Early Indications II: Vendor Tectonics
The following headlines were selected from the News.com website on
Monday September 26:
-Cingular to launch music download service in 2006
-Verizon switches on TV service
-Intel launches WiMax trials in Asia
-T-Mobile to invest in 3G in U.S.
-Google confirms it's testing wireless service
-Verizon Wireless teams with notebook makers
Couple these tidbits with eBay's purchase of Skype, Sony's massive layoffs and attempted reorganization, and Apple's continuing dominance of the handheld entertainment market, and a raft of questions emerges.
1) Will any company be able to duplicate Microsoft's powerful position in desktop computing as new platforms emerge?
2) Which current industry leaders will be acquirers and which will be required in the coming wave of consolidation?
3) What will be the new leverage points that allow hardware, software,
or connection vendors to develop tighter customer relationships and presumably higher profitability?
4) What external forces will help shape this contest?
The list of headlines is at once tantalizing and frustrating: familiar vendors are assuming slippery identities. Cingular is a wireless carrier, but now it sells Motorola phones with Apple iTunes software. Will its music service be a competitor or complement to Apple's? Verizon used to be a phone company, then it became a phone plus half of a mobile phone company, and now it's delivering television. But wait: Google is streaming UPN video and Yahoo is delivering both network shows and original video news reports from ex-CNN reporter Kevin Sites.
On the hardware side, meanwhile, Intel used to live in the computing market, but the company remains determined to make an impact in the Lucent-Ericsson neighborhood as well. Verizon is trying to increase adoption of its wide-area wireless midband service by signing deals with hardware manufacturers. Finally, China's emergence as a hardware factory will have major repercussions.
Let's look at the various players in this new "digital home" environment grouped into three buckets: decliners, question marks, and ascenders.
Decliners:
Despite my respect for Howard Stringer, Sony looks to be in a bad way. The Playstation franchise could remain a bright spot, but the company's high prices and slow time to market may be endemic to the culture and thus not fixable, particularly by an outsider. Sony-Ericsson has not shaken up the mobile handset market and the company's proprietary standards (for memory, among other things) swim against the prevailing tide of open standards.
Slow-moving telecoms, as The Economist suggests, will be undone by VoIP. Surprisingly, the magazine's second most vulnerable company, in its heavy reliance on voice revenues, was Vodaphone; other nominees include British Telecom, SBC, and Telecom Italia.
Other decliners, such as AT&T and IBM's PC unit, have already been sold. In the future, players like Paul Allen's Charter Communications, Ericsson, Time Warner, Philips' consumer electronics business, and others could be similarly vulnerable to takeover.
Question marks:
Motorola seems to have been defibrillated by new CEO Ed Zander. The Razr phone has become a must-have, and the Rokr iPod phone will bear watching. In the carrier market, Moto's Canopy system is much farther along than Intel's WiMax. Whether the company can compete within a footprint that remains broad (even after the semiconductor unit was spun out) is the big question: can the same company profitably sell home networking, military radios, carrier gear, and smart phones?
Microsoft certainly counts as front-page news these days, with lead stories in both the Wall Street Journal and Business Week. The culture is clearly in transition as Vista has required new ways of writing code and the executive turnover continues to mount. Microsoft also has prime real estate in the current platform, and substantial cash with which to buy a competitor as instant access to new markets. The centrism of the PC to the firm's worldview may be a limiting factor, given how quickly Google has innovated and how prominently smartphones figure in the global market.
Apple has soared on the success of the iPod's excellent combination of
hardware, software, and content. But what happens to the computer
piece of the franchise? And can the successor to the iPod do the same
thing for video? Getting permissions will be harder (and indeed some
music rightsholders may successfully renegotiate rates), the network
connections will need to be faster, and video viewing -- unlike music
listening -- is not a background activity. Getting the interface to
be as intuitive and smooth may also be harder.
Nokia has ridden a roller coaster over the past few years as its
various phones have touched or failed to touch the nerve of a
fashion-conscious public. Revenues have been declining while profit has been highly variable. The company's future depends in large measure on carriers over which it has limited control, and on usage habits which are similarly fickle. Finally, content providers like Yahoo, Disney, and Newscorp may have a large say in the company's fate as phones become TV substitutes.
Aggressive telecom and cable providers have connections to the home or
customer that are fast and getting faster. They also have limited
control over programming costs, and face competition both from each
other (Comcast offers voice even as Verizon offers TV) and from
satellite. The list of broadband pioneers also includes Orange,
Korea's KT, and Yahoo BB in Japan. Balancing the value brought by a
fast connection with content-driven revenues will remain the challenge
for these companies.
Ascenders:
Google is clearly frightening the industry. The firm's deep pockets,
inventiveness, and sheer technical prowess mean that new product and
service announcements can come from any sector of the technology map.
(Speaking of talent, Vint Cerf, Rob Pike, Adam Bosworth, and more than 100 former Microsoft developers all work there.) The company has a strong and growing presence on the PC desktop, unsurpassed Linux experience and expertise, deep knowledge of mapping and image searches, testbeds in wireless and cell phone markets, and the attention of smart people all over the world who want to work there. Google could expand its voice chat into full-fledged voice over IP (and become a phone company), or sell a super-cheap network-centric PC running a non-Microsoft OS, or make any of a dozen other bold plays that would truly disrupt existing industries.
Like Google, Yahoo has lots of cash and has been hiring superstar
talent. It has more media savvy and focus among its leadership team,
and may well morph into more of a Viacom/Newscorp competitor than a
technology company. As navigating the home page makes clear, however,
managing the extreme breadth of services (from driving directions to
dating, finance to fantasy football to photos) might become unwieldy.
Samsung is on a roll. The company now has the most powerful Asian
brand in the world, surpassing Sony this year, according to
Interbrand. The company's displays, memory, and cell phones all hold
leadership positions in their markets, and the patent portfolio is
strong. Unlike Microsoft or Nokia, Samsung is probably equally
comfortable in a wired or unwired universe. Also unlike most American
companies, Samsung is well positioned for growth in the developing
world including India and China given its geographic presence and
price points.
After completely reinventing the economics of the PC industry, Dell
has begun moving into adjoining markets: its flat-panel TV prices
undercut most name brands by hundreds of dollars, for example. Its
MP3 players will never challenge the iPod for design quality, but like
the Axim handhelds they continue to improve while maintaining a low
price point. To a certain extent Dell stands to gain as a result of
Microsoft's heavy marketing in support of Vista next year, but the
company is now sufficiently diversified, both product-wise and
geographically, that its fates are no longer tied to Microsoft's.
Who's missing:
It's hard to know where to put the companies that will make the
digital home possible. EMS providers like Jabil Circuit, logistics
companies like FedEx, and component manufacturers including Intel and
Synaptics (which makes scroll wheels) all could profit regardless of
which of the branded companies win in the consumer market.
Infrastructure and business services providers including Cisco, IBM,
HP, Oracle, and SAP could similarly benefit, depending on their
presence in a given vertical.
Finally, retailers including Best Buy, Wal-Mart, and Dixons stand to
benefit if they can master the merchandising and logistics required by
rapidly changing, complex bundles of products and services: it will no
longer suffice merely to move boxes. The retailers' challenge will
soon include such elements as liability for recycling toxic waste like
that found in PCs and cell phones, reverse logistics for returns, and
serving as a systems integrator for connected systems that to date
require considerable expertise to install and manage.
Wild cards:
Government regulation will play an important role is sorting out
winners from losers. Rules for broadband competition, copyright
duration and extent, and protection of national "champions" (such as
telecoms like Telstra or France Telecom with government ownership
interest) only begin the list of extra-market forces.
Finally, and most crucially, revenue models are in the midst of a
dramatic reinvention. In telecom alone, Skype threatens minute- and
distance-based pricing with obsolescence, competing broadband
technologies break any natural monopoly that might have existed, and
new forms of seemingly peripheral content like games and ringtones
play a disproportionate role in determining profitability. Elsewhere,
expensive investments in global news organizations (think of CNN) or
movie studios (think Viacom) could become boat anchors as their
relevance declines in the face of bottom-up alternatives like news
blogs or digital moviemaking and distribution.
The ultimate signal of the market's volatility is the reluctance of
both consumers and manufacturers to commit to new standards:
high-definition audio, high-capacity DVD, and high-bandwidth wireless
are only three examples of multi-billion dollar hesitation and
disagreement. Until obsolescence is no longer at the top of buyers'
concerns, demand will remain inhibited. Paradoxicallly, the current
state of messy competitiveness could be Microsoft's legacy: in the
absence of a dominant vendor as all the players seek to prevent a
leader from emerging, customers lack assurance of interoperability and
backwards compatibility, and remain -- intelligently -- tentative.
--Dr. John Jordan
Founder, Still River Research
Posted by John Jordan at October 3, 2005 10:54 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.guidewiregroup.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/79
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Early Indications II: Vendor Tectonics:
» hoodia from hoodia
No one can look back on his schooldays and say with truth that they were altogether unhappy. [Read More]
Tracked on June 25, 2006 01:54 AM