boisterousbob

The Winner-Takes-All Smartphone

Essence I think you have to look at value for money not just price. Games on PSP, DS etc. typically cost many millions of dollars to produce, with everyone from graphic artists to music producers involved in the overall production. Games on the iPhone are typically very inexpensive and produced by one or two people. This may change over time as individuals and small companies drop out of iPhone app production. As the ecosystem matures and peoples' willingness to pay for novelty crap subsides, only professional software developers will remain, and both prices and quality will increase.

Some of this also comes down to capabilities, there really is no competition between an iPhone and a PSP in terms of the quality of game that can be produced. Appstore will still sell games for sure, iPhone has the convenience factor. But comparing a leading PSP game with a leading iPhone game is rather like comparing a Cadillac (or at least a Chevrolet) with a children's bicycle.


No I don't hate AAPL I am long the stock, own several of their products and love the company. I just think that comparing a wonderful phone with a wonderful gaming console is a tiny bit silly.

On Dec 22 12:47 PM Essence wrote:

> I keep hearing - and getting confused - with references to the iPhone
> being expensive. For a smart phone, you cannot get more bang for
> your buck than you can with the iPhone. Everyone else is MORE expensive.
> (iPhone 3G for $99???) And Apple invented the concept of free or
> almost free apps - equivalent games on the PSP or the DS are 4 -
> 10 times more expensive!
>
> This doesn't sound like the Apple of yesteryear. They ARE competitive
> on price. VERY competitive. That, I suspect, changes everything.
>
>
> I suspect RIMM is going to find it very challenging to transfer their
> operating system into the new world quickly enough and to truly capture
> the consumer market. Android will be a significant challenge to the
> iPhone as the hardware choices multiply but why will there not be
> room for all of them? The mobile handset market is world's larger
> than the PC market ever was and compatibility isn't the same issue
> with phones that it was in the early PC days.

Corporate IT Spending to Continue Rising in 2010

Paul thankyou for sharing this with us.

The changewave data is really interesting and very encouraging for AAPL longs on adoption by the corporate sector which really looks to be picking up strength.

The Winner-Takes-All Smartphone

Going right against the trend I am going to suggest that the appStore (for iPhone as a target at least) will be a truly spectacular flash in the pan.

People have short attention spans and it is only so long that people will find applications like this amusing www.mobilecrunch.com/2...


So much of the stuff on appstore is duplicate and/or utter garbage, and cannot possibly be making a profit for the application writers. You only have to look at the distribution of downloads to see that.


To be honest, I expect that appStore as an incubator will find many new uses for software on a phone. However, of the 100K or 500K or how ever many apps end up on there only a tiny percentage will turn out to have any longevity. These profitable apps will naturally appear on other successful platforms in time anyway.

Disclosure. Long AAPL.

Research in Motion Finally Gets Moving

Lenny I started commenting and then I got concerned people might just think I am your alter ego.

I agree with everything you wrote. I am long both AAPL and RIMM because I think they both have wonderful prospects although for quite different reasons.

I would agree that the appstore is both brilliant and irrelevant for a large tranche of consumers all at the same time.

It is also quite possible that the world will tire the novelty of watching movies and managing their finances on a 3" screen, and of the 100K apps the 7 (or 32 or whatever) that are "must have" will appear on every platform anyway. This evolution will take time, like when the world went gaga for 50 function digital watches for a couple years before returning to buying watches that tell the time and look good. Don't get me wrong, AAPL can make a ton of money meantime.

In any case, I have no idea why people insist on pitching AAPL against RIMM, when there is plenty of room for both at the expense of Samsung, Nokia, Motorola et al.

Can RIM Keep Up with Apple and Android?

"Average selling prices. RIM has been using “buy one, get one free” promotions in recent quarters. "

This seems to be a common misconception. RIM has NOT been using these promotions, the network operators have.

RIM's ASP came in exactly on forecast at $317 per unit, and is projected at $320 for next Q.

What you are seeing is network operators (who are raising their monthly charges) subsidizing the purchase of the phone more heavily.

Can RIM Keep Up with Apple and Android?

One differentiator RIMM point to is their partnering with the network operators, and providing technologies to maximize use of network capacity, for example BBM.

We have seen how iPhone was able to crush the AT&T network, leading to frustrated customers and higher monthly data charges now and on the horizon.

I think this is an area to watch because, if it becomes markedly cheaper to use a Blackberry than a competing device, that could give RIMM a useful edge.

Disclosure long RIMM and AAPL.

Several Ways to Play RIM

QWERTY keyboards are a problem in China? This is curious. I would assume that most people considering an iphone can use a computer.

Guess what type of keyboard computers have, even in China? Hint: It begins with Q and ends in WERTY.

Apple vs. Amazon: An iTablet Would Redefine the Ebook Market

The tablet will require a data connection. As voice becomes free once you have data (and as everyone will ultimately buy data), this seems a very sensible evolution for carrier subsidy.

Well, it seems sensible to me at least :)


On Dec 09 05:31 PM Apple Investor wrote:

> A subsidized Mac Tablet, iSlate, whatever? I don't know. A tablet
> is a cool device for sure, but it's not something you'll be carrying
> with you everywhere you go, not like a cell phone. I just don't see
> the value proposition there for the carrier.
>
> I do agree with you on the margin. It would be hard to believe that
> Apple would enter into any product line without seeing at least a
> 30% profit margin.
>
> On Dec 09 05:23 PM Paul Zimbardo wrote:

The Google Phone, Unlocked (Confirmed and More Details)

Unlocking an iphone is free. A quick search on google (see, I am with the program), coupled with the ability to follow a few simple plain english instructions is all that is required.

Or as you say, a trip to the nearest china town and a $10 bill.


On Dec 13 04:22 PM M-P wrote:

> You can already jailbreak or crack the iPhone + others (at least
> for TDMA/GSM variant vs. CDMA) ... at least it's available to do
> for a reasonable price ... I agree that it's better to be the "arms
> dealer" here vs. alienating the channel ... we'll see.

The Google Phone, Unlocked (Confirmed and More Details)

I think this concept is a bit silly. Maybe I am being naive.

People don't like paying for their phones they want them subsidized. This leads to two consequences:

People with contracts almost always buy a new phone when their contract expires, so who cares if it is unlocked or not?

People with pay as you go are looking for lowest price, and will almost always choose an inexpensive handset. So who cares if it is unlocked or not?

I suppose this could open up the market for second hand handsets, for people who want to spend even less money on portable communicators. But new phones are so cheap, who cares if old ones are unlocked or not?

The Unlocked Phone Movement Gets a Big Boost

I am struggling with the idea that the tablet kills smartphones. Assuming the most common forecasts are in the right ballpark, do I really want to try stuffing a $1000, 10" tablet into my pocket instead of a phone? Personally, I wouldn't bet on it.

For me the most obvious target market is currently satisfied by netbooks and smaller laptops. AAPL would presumably make a product which is less open and significantly less expandable than current offerings, but does have that slick AAPL appeal. An interesting competition!


On Dec 13 02:05 PM JamesApple wrote:

> Apple tablet is making every smartphone, cellphone, notebook and
> netbook, e-readers obosolete. Apple tablet is the game changer that
> makes even unlocked smartphones obsolete.
>
> Apple tablet can run Apple OSX, Microsoft Windows, iPhone OS concurrently
> in up to 7 concurrent Apple tablet windows. The Apple tablet runs
> on a Intel I7 975 CPU, 32 gigabytes of Ram, 2 terabytes of RAID 0
> harddisks, the 10.1" HD screen has a resolution of 4096 x 8192, battery
> life is 6 months, 0.2" thick, 8 USB3 ports, 2 Bluetooths, satellite
> modem capable of dynamic CDMA, GSM, WiMax, LTE, all the radio technologies
> available, 12 megapixel camera with 36x zoom Niki lens with 2x natural
> sunlight flash torch, the entire Apple tablet weights only 0.8 pound,
> has NSA tripleDES hardware encryption top secret level security,
> 52 card slot readers, made of space shuttle alloy capable of taking
> meteor impacts, submerge up to 6000' under water, and yes, free if
> charge if you subscribe to a 1 year contract with China Unicom.<br/>
>
> Merry Christmas, and sleep well. Zzzzzz

Nokia Look-Ahead to December 2009 Quarterly Results

I can't help feeling that the last three comments mistake making the coolest products first from running a profitable enterprise. First mover advantage is expensive and risky. Updating and cleaning up on other people's innovations less so. A reminder for the AAPL officianado's, the massive innovation of Sony's Walkman coupled with buying music studios was updated into a massive success by AAPL with ipod. The much bigger innovation was by Sony, mobile personal music was a whole concept which did not previously exist. Turning it into mp3 equivalent, and updating the distribution mechanism was an incremental innovation of Sony's model, and look at that success!

Don't count Nokia out in areas where they aren't first, unless you are day/swing trading rather than investing. They still have 40% of the worlds handset market. And we can bash RIMM all we like, but they still sell the most popular smartphone in america and in case you missed it that means AAPL doesn't.

Nokia isn't dead, and still worth watching if not investing in now, to see what they can do with their billions.

Disclosure, long AAPL and RIMM.

Research In Motion: Still the Best Positioned Smartphones Play

On Nov 06 01:27 PM JamesApple wrote:
>
> What makes you think Apple cannot make a new iron clad
> secure corporate smartphone

Nothing. You completely missed the point. I didn't suggest AAPL "couldn't do this". I suggested that they are not trying to.

Research In Motion: Still the Best Positioned Smartphones Play

I would have thought this list is testimony to AAPL's abject lack of interest in corporates so far. Kraft is the only notable large multinational that I see. Can you imagine what this list would look like for RIMM?

AAPL has no history of great success with corporates in any of its product lines. Maybe this is about to change, but I just don't see the focus on it.

iPhone is a nightmare to deploy in a corporate environment compared with a Blackberry. For a start you have to disable most of its features such as access to appStore, integration with non corporate email systems etc in order to make it safe enough to use. And, I'm sorry, what exactly IS an iphone without these features? Then you are missing features you need which are antiethical to AAPL, such as native ability to read MSFT format documents.

I am sure AAPL could crack this market, I just don't see them trying.


On Nov 06 09:09 AM pk de cville wrote:

> Here's the business argument for iPhone.
>
> Highly competitive creative businesses are using it in very innovative
> ways. How long will it take for testimonials like these to open the
> doors to large enterprise environments?
>
> www.apple.com/iphone/b...
>

Research In Motion: Still the Best Positioned Smartphones Play

We do see that VZ has positioned RIMM against other phones for some time. Of concern to me, though, is VZ seemingly positioning the new MOT phone as its new flagship product. If we believe marketing can make a difference, and as VZ is pouring money into Droid as its "biggest marketing campaign ever", then this has to concern RIMM stock holders.

Long RIMM and not bashing, but RIMM do rely on network operators to market their product and so I do have concerns in this area. Let's watch how splashy and successful this marketing campaign really is.