Seeking Alpha

Scott Berry

View as an RSS Feed
View Scott Berry's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Would You Like a Kindle With That e-Book Order? [View article]
    @NetworkBob, you make my point pretty well, if a bit more colorfully. Nobody said anyone would be doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.
    Mar 11 10:11 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Would You Like a Kindle With That e-Book Order? [View article]
    I disagree @imersion. Cost determines the minimum (profitable) price you can charge, but has no bearing on the maximum. Particularly when choices are limited.

    If publishers control pricing by making similar deals with distributors like Amazon and B&N, where exactly will readers go to get the latest Tom Clancy novel, for instance? Every store will have the hardcover for $17-$20, and the e-book for $15-$17, what is the alternative for a Clancy fan? Or maybe sales fall off so they lower the e-price to $14. That's a far cry from the marginal cost of pennies to download the book and process a sale.

    This isn't to suggest that all e-books will cost $25. But they won't necessarily be as cheap as their cost would suggest. Particularly popular ones. Self-published fare is, of course, another matter. The point is that they will be incented to give away readers to get more customer into digital books, and they will make more profit as a result.
    Mar 11 03:57 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Ceragon's Purchase Boosts Prospects and Ultimately Price [View article]
    Agreed. CRNT is selling guns and ammunition in the mobile war. Nice position to be in.
    Jan 21 10:19 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Would You Like a Kindle With That e-Book Order? [View article]
    @switch, all good points. However, I never said every book would become expensive. I also noted it didn't apply to self-publishers (and should have included a longer similar list as you did).

    The point is that (a) people will pay for convenience, and (b) reader prices will drop, making (a) more possible for publishers to implement.

    You're right, people aren't stupid, and neither are publishers. But they will game this for maximum overall profit.

    For die-hard fans and popular books, prices will be much higher. For obscure or less popular ones, prices will be lower, obviously.

    - New unexpected 8th Harry Potter hardcover debuts at $20

    - E-version prices at $17, any Potter fan with an e-reader grumbles but buys it anyway. Even though they think it should be $8. Especially since hardcover is 3 inches thick. :-)

    Some books are oxygen to some people, most aren't. (Basic) reader prices will plummet nonetheless.
    Mar 29 09:57 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Would You Like a Kindle With That e-Book Order? [View article]
    You make good points, Roger, though I have also seen a data point that estimates all EBRs at 10M as of end of last year (and another puts the Kindle at about 5M). Clearly there are a lot of estimates out there. Plus the 8M iPad estimate is 3 or 4 months old as well.

    Regardless, how does that affect the main point? I still see digital book prices rising and EBR prices (at least for entry-level models) dropping significantly.
    Mar 12 07:29 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Clearwire Forecast Is Foggy, Then Stormy: Pair Trades to Help Weather It [View article]
    All I have to say is that the pair trade I suggested on March 24 would have netted some decent returns. DRWI down about 47%, while CRNT dropped only 32% over the same period.
    Jul 22 08:15 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Downside to iPhone Success [View article]
    Well, for my idea to be impossible, it seems at least one of the following have to be true:

    1. Apple is perfect and never allows anything *that could be susceptible to* a virus get through its store.

    2. No iPhone ever accesses any content from any other iPhone or the Internet that might be used to infect a susceptible app or phone.

    So which one is it? My point was simply that more phones + more apps + more connectivity = more viruses. It also means the virus is likely to be more widespread.
    Jan 7 09:53 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Downside to iPhone Success [View article]
    Wow, I haven't made so many friends since I suggested maybe WiMax wasn't the savior of mankind after all...

    Good feedback from a few here. Others maybe ought to more carefully read what I read, and take off your AAPL-tinted shades. I'm not attacking the brilliance of Jobs or his engineers. Though I'm continually dismayed at the thin skins on some of his fans.

    Frankly, I have nothing but respect for Apple's design and usability. In fact I said that. The point remains that no matter how good it is, they are now a MUCH bigger target (the iPhone, not Macs). And hackers aren't only interested in kudos or in attacking "affluent" markets. Just ask any of the many whose PCs have been co-opted to become spam generators.

    Nowhere did I say hacking iPhones would be as easy as Windows, nor did I say it would be easy at all. Only that it would happen.

    I also didn't state that anyone would be attacking the App store directly (though I suppose I did imply it, and am happy to be educated here) . There could be other entry points, particularly as people start using "non-certified" apps on unlocked phones. Regardless, there *will* be viruses striking iPhones. How frequent, how damaging, and how easy all remain to be seen. To suggest otherwise just isn't sensible.

    And last, I'm not "pro-RIM" or "pro-Android" and "anti-Apple". Reread what I said. I expect Android to be much more vulnerable to viruses for the exact reason many commenters said--lack of central control of the market. However, there is no scale in either RIM or Android (yet).

    I do believe strongly that there are disadvantages to Apple's closed ecosystem(s), but most of them accrue to users and to the device market, not so much to Apple's business. If the iPhone continues on the growth track that is making my thesis more likely, that can't help but improve AAPL's stock price, despite fallout from any virus issues.
    Jan 6 11:21 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery? [View article]
    Everyone is missing the obvious, here. Akamai's Marketing department has clearly failed in their messaging.

    Akamai is not selling streaming delivery for *more*, they are offering a *discount on HTTP*. That would make the question "why is Akamai the only CDN that discounts downloads?" :-)
    Oct 9 10:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Real Networks New DVD Ripper: Are You for Real? [View article]
    Excuse me, "rocket surgery"? :-)

    Otherwise a nice piece, Mathew. I agree totally, this is one of the most lame-grained schemes I've ever seen. Yet another reason my computers have all remained "unReal" for years.
    Sep 9 09:19 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • DivX Breaks Ground in Supporting Flash Video [View article]
    Yes, this is correct. The Connected box is functionally not much more than a DivX codec paired with a WiFi card.

    The server software on the PC converts everything (including photos and music, plus your stored video) into a DivX encoded stream which is sent to the client box. Because the PC does the heavy lifting, it's infinitely flexible and evolvable.

    Brilliant idea, really, especially if they're successful in getting Connected embedded directly into TVs and DVRs.
    Sep 8 09:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Comcast Limits User Downloads: Wrong Solution [View article]
    @Julio -- That's true in the abstract, though most offer mainly consumer and business (the latter little more than bribery to run a server).

    What I'd like to see is much more granularity, and in particular some incentives to "trade up". If I have a base 2 Mb/s service, where's the sales pitch to go to 5 or 10 or 20 or 50 Mb/s? If they're truly in the access business that's the model I'd expect.
    Sep 4 02:56 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Does Apple's iPhone Increase Browsing? [View article]
    Actually, the title is what set me off: "Does the iPhone Increase Browsing?" That sure implies causality to me.

    After re-reading, I agree that the article itself is neutral. Mea culpa for being too quick on the trigger.

    @jimmx, no, that's not what I meant. I believe that people who already did a lot of browsing (on any platform) were more likely to be early adopter types, which is the same type who would naturally be attracted to the iPhone in the first place.

    I believe this is likely to be a much stronger contributor to increased browsing than people who bought an iPhone, all of a sudden "discovered" they could surf the internet better, and then decided to do it more.
    Sep 4 11:57 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fiber To the Home: Will They Ever Learn? [View article]
    When our local telecableco cabal is ready to offer the services that require that kinds of bandwidth, they'll be more than happy to provide the bandwidth. They want to sell us the pipe and every bit that goes over it as well.

    If they give us the bandwidth first, they're afraid we'll find a way to use it that cuts them out of any additional revenue stream. And they're right.

    Monopolies suck.
    Sep 4 10:41 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Comcast Limits User Downloads: Wrong Solution [View article]
    Careful. QoS is nothing more than a way to control what content you can receive, masquerading as "improved performance".

    Higher bandwidth/speed is cheaper to provide (I'm talking infrastructure, here) than QoS. Always has been.
    Sep 4 10:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
60 Comments
4 Likes