<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>kdssf's Comments</title>
    <description>kdssf's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com</description>
    <link>http://seekingalpha.com/user/3756411/comments</link>
    <item>
      <title>Will The X-Phone Kill The Android Monster?</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1278821/comments?source=feed#comment-16354541</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16354541</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Don't be so sure that Android ad revenue for Google will be greater than iOS this year...  iOS users still generate the vast majority of web traffic from mobile devices...  Most of the Android devices out there, including Samsung's, are relatively low-end phones used in developing markets and the ad revenue is just not appearing (yet) in high volume...<br/><br/>What a difference 18 months makes...  After Google spent billions to aquire Motorola Mobility, a business that continues to fade, Samsung has emerged as serious threat to Google's own device business...  And unlike Apple, Google cannot discard them as a partner...  In fact, to get the U.S. government's blessing of their MM acquisition, Google had to agree to continue to provide Android for free for the next five years!  Talk about feeding the enemy!<br/><br/>The Samsung-Google relationship over the next few years will be fascinating to watch...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 20:36:46 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Don't be so sure that Android ad revenue for Google will be greater than iOS this year...  iOS users still generate the vast majority of web traffic from mobile devices...  Most of the Android devices out there, including Samsung's, are relatively low-end phones used in developing markets and the ad revenue is just not appearing (yet) in high volume...<br/><br/>What a difference 18 months makes...  After Google spent billions to aquire Motorola Mobility, a business that continues to fade, Samsung has emerged as serious threat to Google's own device business...  And unlike Apple, Google cannot discard them as a partner...  In fact, to get the U.S. government's blessing of their MM acquisition, Google had to agree to continue to provide Android for free for the next five years!  Talk about feeding the enemy!<br/><br/>The Samsung-Google relationship over the next few years will be fascinating to watch...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Scarce Supply Means Google's Nexus Is A Winner</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1069601/comments?source=feed#comment-12753161</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">12753161</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA['Out of stock' means nothing without unit shipment information...<br/><br/>Apple remains the only manufacturer who provides unit shipment information on a quarterly basis...  Amazon and Google are notoriously opaque about their product sales...<br/><br/>Without numbers, assessing the upside or downside of supply-demand imbalance is a fool's errand...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2012 19:55:49 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA['Out of stock' means nothing without unit shipment information...<br/><br/>Apple remains the only manufacturer who provides unit shipment information on a quarterly basis...  Amazon and Google are notoriously opaque about their product sales...<br/><br/>Without numbers, assessing the upside or downside of supply-demand imbalance is a fool's errand...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Consider Selling Apple Stock</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1069481/comments?source=feed#comment-12709451</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">12709451</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[&quot;Unless Apple comes up with new products, I believe that Apple's stock would continue to decline.&quot;<br/><br/>Ya, if they stop making new products, that's definitely bad for the stock price...  Nice insight...<br/><br/>And in what Universe, exaclty, is Apple going to stop making new products?<br/><br/>Really, guys, some of the analysis here is getting pretty lame...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:40:35 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[&quot;Unless Apple comes up with new products, I believe that Apple's stock would continue to decline.&quot;<br/><br/>Ya, if they stop making new products, that's definitely bad for the stock price...  Nice insight...<br/><br/>And in what Universe, exaclty, is Apple going to stop making new products?<br/><br/>Really, guys, some of the analysis here is getting pretty lame...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>What Wal-Mart's Promotion Of The Apple iPhone Means For Both Companies</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1069331/comments?source=feed#comment-12704931</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">12704931</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Sometimes people analyze a little too much...<br/><br/>This is a simple story: WalMart is embracing the iPhone and iPad for the same reason it stopped selling Amazon's Kindle - it has no interest in promoting hardware and services from companies it competes with... That includes Amazon and Google...<br/><br/>WalMart also has its own reputation to maintain as a low-cost leader; hence, the discounting... If these promotions pull more people in, WalMart does just fine... And Apple receives the same net revenue... No harm, no foul...<br/><br/>Apple understands it needs to grow its ecosystem as well as maintain its margins... So if discounters want to slice their own margins, that's fine!<br/><br/>This is all good for Apple - there really is no downside at all...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:28:59 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Sometimes people analyze a little too much...<br/><br/>This is a simple story: WalMart is embracing the iPhone and iPad for the same reason it stopped selling Amazon's Kindle - it has no interest in promoting hardware and services from companies it competes with... That includes Amazon and Google...<br/><br/>WalMart also has its own reputation to maintain as a low-cost leader; hence, the discounting... If these promotions pull more people in, WalMart does just fine... And Apple receives the same net revenue... No harm, no foul...<br/><br/>Apple understands it needs to grow its ecosystem as well as maintain its margins... So if discounters want to slice their own margins, that's fine!<br/><br/>This is all good for Apple - there really is no downside at all...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Only one person was standing outside the Apple (AAPL) store in Shanghai's financial district today, when the iPhone 5 went on sale for the first time in China. That's in contrast to the frenzy that accompanied the launch of the iPhone 4S. And while the new device will probably sell strongly, the lack of a deal with China Mobile (CHL) continues to hamper Apple in the country.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/720101?source=feed#comment-12604401</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">12604401</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Wow.  The 'analysis' from Seeking Alpha continues to go downhill...<br/><br/>An obvious reason that the lines are smaller is that Apple has put controls in place for scalpers and made it far easier for customers to purchase through online ordering and pick-up reservations.  At the end of the day, nobody likes to stand in long lines.  It's not in Apple's interest to propogate that, even for PR - it's in their interest to create a purchasing experience that does not require standing in a long line...<br/><br/>The lines in the U.S. were way shorter for iPhone 5 as well, but Apple still can't keep up with demand, which is robust...<br/><br/>Keep selling, guys!  And I'll keep buying... :)]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:06:50 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Wow.  The 'analysis' from Seeking Alpha continues to go downhill...<br/><br/>An obvious reason that the lines are smaller is that Apple has put controls in place for scalpers and made it far easier for customers to purchase through online ordering and pick-up reservations.  At the end of the day, nobody likes to stand in long lines.  It's not in Apple's interest to propogate that, even for PR - it's in their interest to create a purchasing experience that does not require standing in a long line...<br/><br/>The lines in the U.S. were way shorter for iPhone 5 as well, but Apple still can't keep up with demand, which is robust...<br/><br/>Keep selling, guys!  And I'll keep buying... :)]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>As Google Maps Humiliates Apple, The Upside Is Millions Will Finally Upgrade To iOS 6</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1064211/comments?source=feed#comment-12604051</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">12604051</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Wow!  Someone watched 'several people' upgrade their iPhones to IOS6 because of Google Maps...  What insightul and deep analysis...  Good to hear those few people have been added to the 200 million who upgraded so far...<br/><br/>The Maps thing is absolutely embarrassing for Apple from a brand and reputation perspective, it is easy pickings to find funny visual artifacts, Apple is definitely held to a higher standard than Google, and of course there's no transit on Apple Maps...  However, this will all fade away...  People will slowly realize that now they have Street View on the iPhone!  Didn't have that with iOS 5.  AND, they have integrated 3D flyovers and a superior turn-by-visual interface with Apple maps...  Best of both worlds...  Compared to Android fragmented and confused ecosystem, this is all a huge advantage for Apple...<br/><br/>Competition is great, and it is only making iOS and its ecosystem the best one around...  Google could have avoided all of this by making Google Maps better earlier, but they didn't...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:58:58 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Wow!  Someone watched 'several people' upgrade their iPhones to IOS6 because of Google Maps...  What insightul and deep analysis...  Good to hear those few people have been added to the 200 million who upgraded so far...<br/><br/>The Maps thing is absolutely embarrassing for Apple from a brand and reputation perspective, it is easy pickings to find funny visual artifacts, Apple is definitely held to a higher standard than Google, and of course there's no transit on Apple Maps...  However, this will all fade away...  People will slowly realize that now they have Street View on the iPhone!  Didn't have that with iOS 5.  AND, they have integrated 3D flyovers and a superior turn-by-visual interface with Apple maps...  Best of both worlds...  Compared to Android fragmented and confused ecosystem, this is all a huge advantage for Apple...<br/><br/>Competition is great, and it is only making iOS and its ecosystem the best one around...  Google could have avoided all of this by making Google Maps better earlier, but they didn't...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>What's All The Hubbub About Over The iPad Mini Pricing?</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/944991/comments?source=feed#comment-10850331</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">10850331</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Scott,<br/>Right on, right on, right on...<br/>The iPad mini's price point is rational and appropriate...<br/>The folks who are complaining are wishful thinkers who aren't really paying enough attention...<br/><br/>Kudos for pushing back on the conventional wisdom!]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 13:01:57 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Scott,<br/>Right on, right on, right on...<br/>The iPad mini's price point is rational and appropriate...<br/>The folks who are complaining are wishful thinkers who aren't really paying enough attention...<br/><br/>Kudos for pushing back on the conventional wisdom!]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Google's (GOOG -8.4%) Q3 results are out early, and they missed estimates. EPS of $9.03 missed by $1.62, and revenue of $11.33B (+51% Y/Y, boosted by Motorola acquisition) missed by $530M. Shares are diving.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/594611?source=feed#comment-10665981</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">10665981</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Not a surprise! Google's acquisition of Motorola added revenue but absolutely no margin...  It will also dampen G's historical growth rates...  A 22x price-earnings is too rich, as the market discovered today...<br/><br/>This is the first full quarter of results with Motorola attached, and the breakdown won't be pretty...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:29:49 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Not a surprise! Google's acquisition of Motorola added revenue but absolutely no margin...  It will also dampen G's historical growth rates...  A 22x price-earnings is too rich, as the market discovered today...<br/><br/>This is the first full quarter of results with Motorola attached, and the breakdown won't be pretty...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Apple: One More Thing</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/863901/comments?source=feed#comment-9842391</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9842391</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[The original iPhone created a blue ocean, a new market, and Apple dominated for the first couple of years...  The tail on blue oceans typically last 7-10 years...  The iPhone is now 5 years old...  Apple will definitely need to raise the bar again in the next couple of years or risk swimming in a more commoditized, lower-margin, red ocean business...  OR, like the Mac, be content with a small market share...<br/><br/>Android is already beating them in market share, but most of those sales are low-end devices (or closed devices like Kindle), and they are not generating much revenue-generating traffic for Google...  That will change in the next couple of years, however - both Motorola and Samsung will continue to improve their offerings...  They both throw lots of darts, but they're starting to hit the target...  Apple absolutely cannot rest on their laurels, and without Steve, it may be harder for them to come up with the new, new thing...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:10:01 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[The original iPhone created a blue ocean, a new market, and Apple dominated for the first couple of years...  The tail on blue oceans typically last 7-10 years...  The iPhone is now 5 years old...  Apple will definitely need to raise the bar again in the next couple of years or risk swimming in a more commoditized, lower-margin, red ocean business...  OR, like the Mac, be content with a small market share...<br/><br/>Android is already beating them in market share, but most of those sales are low-end devices (or closed devices like Kindle), and they are not generating much revenue-generating traffic for Google...  That will change in the next couple of years, however - both Motorola and Samsung will continue to improve their offerings...  They both throw lots of darts, but they're starting to hit the target...  Apple absolutely cannot rest on their laurels, and without Steve, it may be harder for them to come up with the new, new thing...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Many iPhone/iPad users aren't happy with Apple's (AAPL) new Maps app, which displaces Google Maps (GOOG) with today's iOS 6 launch. The loss of Street View and public transit data is frustrating many, as are the search results. Even Apple die-hard John Gruber is a critic. The discontent is unlikely to convince Apple to have a change of heart, but it could drive many users to opt for Google's home-grown iOS Maps release (likely to feature ads) when it arrives ... provided Apple doesn't block it. (iPhone 5 reviews)</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/547241?source=feed#comment-9641231</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9641231</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Who writes this stuff?  Street View has NEVER been offered on iOS devices!  The Google Maps version on iOS has never supported it!<br/><br/>And people say they 'miss that' feature in iOS 6?  C'mon!  That was a feature that never existed...<br/><br/>It's fair to say that people want Street View, and they don't yet have it, but let's get the facts straight, shall we?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:11:05 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Who writes this stuff?  Street View has NEVER been offered on iOS devices!  The Google Maps version on iOS has never supported it!<br/><br/>And people say they 'miss that' feature in iOS 6?  C'mon!  That was a feature that never existed...<br/><br/>It's fair to say that people want Street View, and they don't yet have it, but let's get the facts straight, shall we?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Some of the iPhone 5's (AAPL) finer details are getting criticized. Among the issues: 1) The iPhone 5 won't support simultaneous voice and data on Verizon and Sprint's 4G LTE networks, unlike many other LTE phones. 2) A $29 adapter meant to link the iPhone 5's new dock connector with older accessories won't work with some speakers. 3) Until they're rewritten, existing iPhone apps will display black borders on the iPhone 5, due to its larger display and new aspect ratio.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/538731?source=feed#comment-9458491</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9458491</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Oh, the horror!!  Apps will be letter-boxed!!!<br/><br/>Well, if you want to change to a 9:16 aspect ratio, which is certainly an improvement, that's what happens...  In 90 days, they'll all be gone...<br/><br/>Yawn...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:10:18 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Oh, the horror!!  Apps will be letter-boxed!!!<br/><br/>Well, if you want to change to a 9:16 aspect ratio, which is certainly an improvement, that's what happens...  In 90 days, they'll all be gone...<br/><br/>Yawn...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Acer (ASIYF.PK) and Alibaba (ALBCF.PK) just cancelled a smartphone launch featuring the latter's Aliyun OS, and Alibaba is blaming Google (GOOG). Alibaba, whose OS is Linux-based but can run Android apps, claims Google threatened to "terminate Android cooperation" with Acer if it went ahead with the launch. Though Android is technically open-source, Google wields tight control over what its partners can do with the OS. Baidu and Huawei are two other Chinese firms with mobile OS ambitions.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/537381?source=feed#comment-9408601</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9408601</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[The only real difference between iOS and Android is that Apple actually admits iOS is a closed system... Like Windows, however, allowing OEMs to run your stuff does not make it 'open'...<br/><br/>All three OS's are proprietary, all three are controlled... Android is open to developers but relatively closed to OEMs... And the collars on the latter are tightening each year...<br/><br/>Eventually, Samsung, HTC and others will learn this lesson... Like the PC manufacturers before them - HP, Dell, etc. - their continuing dependence on Android will commoditize and severely damage the margins of their mobile hardware business... They are basically selling new hardware portals into Google's monopoly advertising business... That is not a sustainable model for anyone except Google...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:45:36 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[The only real difference between iOS and Android is that Apple actually admits iOS is a closed system... Like Windows, however, allowing OEMs to run your stuff does not make it 'open'...<br/><br/>All three OS's are proprietary, all three are controlled... Android is open to developers but relatively closed to OEMs... And the collars on the latter are tightening each year...<br/><br/>Eventually, Samsung, HTC and others will learn this lesson... Like the PC manufacturers before them - HP, Dell, etc. - their continuing dependence on Android will commoditize and severely damage the margins of their mobile hardware business... They are basically selling new hardware portals into Google's monopoly advertising business... That is not a sustainable model for anyone except Google...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Apple: One More Thing</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/863901/comments?source=feed#comment-9382841</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9382841</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[What I don't get is why Apple doesn't rebrand the 'iPod Touch' the 'iPad Nano'...  That's what it is...  If you think of it that way, I agree the pricing is screwy...  $299 is way too much...<br/><br/>Having said that, not every year is going to introduce 'feature' breakthroughs for the iPhone...  What will make or break Apple's future growth is not the features, but the integration and the ecosystem of apps and services: both quality and quantity, from Apple and its partners...  In those departments (vs. hardware 'features'), Apple is still beating Android hands down...  Android has the activation volume but not the web activity because low-end devices (which consume fewer services) are driving most of its growth...  It also continues to have huge fragmentation and security issues, which are a nightmare for developers...  Hackers love Android; consumers are far more lukewarm...<br/><br/>Bottom line: customer loyalty is still off-the-charts compared to Android or Windows...  That bodes very well for Apple - their customers stick with them, and every year they gain many more customers from Android than they lose to Android...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 19:31:11 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[What I don't get is why Apple doesn't rebrand the 'iPod Touch' the 'iPad Nano'...  That's what it is...  If you think of it that way, I agree the pricing is screwy...  $299 is way too much...<br/><br/>Having said that, not every year is going to introduce 'feature' breakthroughs for the iPhone...  What will make or break Apple's future growth is not the features, but the integration and the ecosystem of apps and services: both quality and quantity, from Apple and its partners...  In those departments (vs. hardware 'features'), Apple is still beating Android hands down...  Android has the activation volume but not the web activity because low-end devices (which consume fewer services) are driving most of its growth...  It also continues to have huge fragmentation and security issues, which are a nightmare for developers...  Hackers love Android; consumers are far more lukewarm...<br/><br/>Bottom line: customer loyalty is still off-the-charts compared to Android or Windows...  That bodes very well for Apple - their customers stick with them, and every year they gain many more customers from Android than they lose to Android...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>More on Google: Eric Schmidt claims 1.3M Android devices are now activated daily, up sharply from the 1M reported in late June. However, only 70K consist of tablets - this translates into a quarterly run rate of 6.3M. By contrast, Apple shipped 17M iPads in the June quarter. That's a big reason why iOS continues to wield an edge on Android in Web traffic, an edge that translates into large search revenue-sharing payments for Google. The arrival of Windows RT tablets stands to further pressure Android.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/524101?source=feed#comment-9124541</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9124541</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Those numbers include Kindle and Nook, which are brain-damaged Android and not really Android at all...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2012 18:26:51 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Those numbers include Kindle and Nook, which are brain-damaged Android and not really Android at all...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>In a rare move, Google (GOOG) has placed an ad on its home page. It's for the company's Nexus 7 tablet, which has sold well thus far, but is expected to receive fresh competition soon from a new Kindle Fire and the iPad Mini. Also, it was just yesterday that Lenovo (LNVGY.PK) launched a new Android tablet. At $300, the IdeaPad A2109 is more costly than the Nexus 7, but it also offers a 9" display. Both devices use Nvidia's (NVDA) Tegra 3 processor.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/511631?source=feed#comment-8869761</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8869761</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Well, the honeymoon with Google is finally over...  This is just the beginning...  The Google experience will continue to deteriorate, just like  Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, etc. - as the company seeks out new revenue in the face of declining margins and a massive move to mobile devices by web users...<br/><br/>The advertising business model that Google has built over the past decade is under assault - not by competitors as much as by consumers themselves - and Google now desperately needs to have some of their other businesses actually make money...  (Oops!  As a condition of their Motorola acquisition, they can't charge money for Android for five years...)  <br/><br/>So prepare yourself for the coming onslaught of Google advertisments for its own products and further 'integration' of its services that more effectively 'monetizes' users...  Meanwhile, the Google brand - while still very popular with hackers and developers - continues to erode with consumers...<br/><br/>The first sign of desperation is when a company begins to break its own rules...  (Exhibit A: Microsoft Surface)  Unfortunately, in Google's case, such rule-breaking will only hasten their inevitable decline from decade-long dominance of web services...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2012 16:23:22 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Well, the honeymoon with Google is finally over...  This is just the beginning...  The Google experience will continue to deteriorate, just like  Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, etc. - as the company seeks out new revenue in the face of declining margins and a massive move to mobile devices by web users...<br/><br/>The advertising business model that Google has built over the past decade is under assault - not by competitors as much as by consumers themselves - and Google now desperately needs to have some of their other businesses actually make money...  (Oops!  As a condition of their Motorola acquisition, they can't charge money for Android for five years...)  <br/><br/>So prepare yourself for the coming onslaught of Google advertisments for its own products and further 'integration' of its services that more effectively 'monetizes' users...  Meanwhile, the Google brand - while still very popular with hackers and developers - continues to erode with consumers...<br/><br/>The first sign of desperation is when a company begins to break its own rules...  (Exhibit A: Microsoft Surface)  Unfortunately, in Google's case, such rule-breaking will only hasten their inevitable decline from decade-long dominance of web services...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Mobile banner ads tend to have much higher click rates, observes ad firm MediaMind. While PC banner click rates amount to just 0.1%-0.4% (depending on geography), mobile click rates range between 0.42% (Asia-Pac) and 1.41% &amp;#40;EMEA&amp;#41;. Google (GOOG), which has been struggling with low mobile ad prices, can take some comfort in that, as can Velti (VELT) and Millennial Media (MM). Facebook (FB), another company facing mobile ad challenges, has seen high click rates for its mobile Sponsored Stories ads.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/509581?source=feed#comment-8836741</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8836741</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I agree, instant purchasing is much less likely with a mobile ad than with a web ad...  Brand awareness ads are worth much less to advertisers...  <br/><br/>It's not clear to me yet if Google can generate the volume on mobile to compensate for their pricing problem...  Each quarter their margins get smaller and smaller...  We'll see...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2012 20:39:51 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I agree, instant purchasing is much less likely with a mobile ad than with a web ad...  Brand awareness ads are worth much less to advertisers...  <br/><br/>It's not clear to me yet if Google can generate the volume on mobile to compensate for their pricing problem...  Each quarter their margins get smaller and smaller...  We'll see...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Mobile banner ads tend to have much higher click rates, observes ad firm MediaMind. While PC banner click rates amount to just 0.1%-0.4% (depending on geography), mobile click rates range between 0.42% (Asia-Pac) and 1.41% &amp;#40;EMEA&amp;#41;. Google (GOOG), which has been struggling with low mobile ad prices, can take some comfort in that, as can Velti (VELT) and Millennial Media (MM). Facebook (FB), another company facing mobile ad challenges, has seen high click rates for its mobile Sponsored Stories ads.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/509581?source=feed#comment-8835731</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8835731</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Click rates are fine, but what really matters to advertisers is how many of those clicks result in purchasing behavior... That is fairly easy for advertisers to measure... In mobile, they are simply not seeing the results (which include accidental clicks), hence the significantly lower pricing of the ads... The real story is that 'click-through' pricing - from which Google generates so much of its revenue - may be a fatally flawed model for mobile advertising...<br/><br/>I agree about the accidents - even popups typically have 'X' close buttons so tiny it's 50/50 when you try to close them... Same thing with Facebook 'sponsored' links - people usually don't notice it's an ad... Advertisers are noticing that these ads aren't producing much revenue for them, hence their unwillingness to pay higher prices...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2012 19:58:00 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Click rates are fine, but what really matters to advertisers is how many of those clicks result in purchasing behavior... That is fairly easy for advertisers to measure... In mobile, they are simply not seeing the results (which include accidental clicks), hence the significantly lower pricing of the ads... The real story is that 'click-through' pricing - from which Google generates so much of its revenue - may be a fatally flawed model for mobile advertising...<br/><br/>I agree about the accidents - even popups typically have 'X' close buttons so tiny it's 50/50 when you try to close them... Same thing with Facebook 'sponsored' links - people usually don't notice it's an ad... Advertisers are noticing that these ads aren't producing much revenue for them, hence their unwillingness to pay higher prices...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>More on the Apple-Samsung verdict: Samsung (SSNLF.PK) has been ruled guilty of infringing additional Apple (AAPL) patents via more than a dozen devices. The jury has also ruled Samsung's infringement of 5 patents was willful (could produce multiple damages), that its parent company induced subsidiaries to infringe, and that none of Apple's patents are invalid. One minor win for Samsung: the Galaxy Tab is deemed innocent of copying the iPad's design. (live blog)</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/507141?source=feed#comment-8752691</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8752691</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[And now onto the appeals...  Apple may never see a dollar from this...  But Apple has made its point successfully, I think Google and its partners will need to watch more carefully what they clone from iOS and Apple's devices...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2012 19:28:33 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[And now onto the appeals...  Apple may never see a dollar from this...  But Apple has made its point successfully, I think Google and its partners will need to watch more carefully what they clone from iOS and Apple's devices...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Google (GOOG) plans to tweak its search algorithm to lower the placement of links to sites enabling piracy. Google faces a tricky balancing act: media content searches appear to generate a lot of query volume (judging by auto-complete recommendations and Google Trends data), but as the owner of YouTube, Google TV, and Google Fiber, the company needs to stay on Hollywood's good side.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/482361?source=feed#comment-8301471</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8301471</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA['Don't be evil?'  What a joke.  What Google can and should do is simply not return links to pirate sites.  But that would threaten its traffic stats and advertising revenue streams...<br/><br/>Google is by far the best large-scale corporate example of the breakdown of personal ethics among the get-rich-quick digital elite...  <br/><br/>The good news is that people are slowly catching on that the Google simply does not respect reasonable boundaries of privacy and copyright...  Searching personal e-mail content to generate more advertising revenue; cookie workarounds that violate privacy laws; illegally downloading wi-fi data (don't worry! we didn't look at it!); enabling unlawful piracy through their own search engine; the list goes on and on...  <br/><br/>Eventually, absent changes to its corporate culture and the personal ethics of its employees, Google will be punished severely by their customers and partners...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2012 19:07:12 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA['Don't be evil?'  What a joke.  What Google can and should do is simply not return links to pirate sites.  But that would threaten its traffic stats and advertising revenue streams...<br/><br/>Google is by far the best large-scale corporate example of the breakdown of personal ethics among the get-rich-quick digital elite...  <br/><br/>The good news is that people are slowly catching on that the Google simply does not respect reasonable boundaries of privacy and copyright...  Searching personal e-mail content to generate more advertising revenue; cookie workarounds that violate privacy laws; illegally downloading wi-fi data (don't worry! we didn't look at it!); enabling unlawful piracy through their own search engine; the list goes on and on...  <br/><br/>Eventually, absent changes to its corporate culture and the personal ethics of its employees, Google will be punished severely by their customers and partners...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Google's World Domination Continues, A Long-Term Bull Case For The Stock</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/790741/comments?source=feed#comment-8215881</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8215881</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[In terms of product diversity, Google is definitely NOT a one-trick pony...  They have phones, tablets, Chromebooks, digital media, YouTube, TV products, glasses, cars, dogs, cats, you name it... <br/><br/>In terms of products that actually make money, however, they certainly are a one-trick pony...  It's search...  Or, more precisely, advertising...<br/><br/>If and when Google's search franchise is attacked effectively, Google is in an extremely poor position to make up the difference with other profit-generating revenue streams...  But in the meantime, the advertising dollars keep rolling in...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2012 14:39:42 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[In terms of product diversity, Google is definitely NOT a one-trick pony...  They have phones, tablets, Chromebooks, digital media, YouTube, TV products, glasses, cars, dogs, cats, you name it... <br/><br/>In terms of products that actually make money, however, they certainly are a one-trick pony...  It's search...  Or, more precisely, advertising...<br/><br/>If and when Google's search franchise is attacked effectively, Google is in an extremely poor position to make up the difference with other profit-generating revenue streams...  But in the meantime, the advertising dollars keep rolling in...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Are Google's Earnings Good Or Bad? Quick, Choose One</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/736191/comments?source=feed#comment-7595831</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7595831</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Google's earning were pretty mediocre, to say the least...  The year-over-year growth rates for 'old' Google contrinues to decline each quarter, from the low 30's to 27 to 24 to this quarter's 21%.  Nice growth, but a terrible trend...  <br/><br/>And Motorola is going to make that worse, not better - Google's early predictions that the acquisition would be accretive were simply a fantasty...  And I'm not buying 'we've only been there a few weeks, please be patient' answer to analysts' questions about their plans for Motorola - they agreed to this deal last August and closed it in May!  C'mon!  One would think they would have a general idea about what they are going to do with the bloated hardware manufacturer now on their books...  That was a purchase driven by patent protection panic, not strategy...<br/><br/>The stock is experiencing a nice pop, for sure...  'Soaring'?  Hardly.<br/><br/>In the meantime, the advertising machine keeps on humming, generating 97% of their profits, but one-trick ponies usually come up lame eventually...  The billions of Larry and Sergei's playtime R&amp;D money have generated nothing yet that earns a dime for shareholders...<br/><br/>And the Google brand continues to get slightly creepier each year...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:51:46 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Google's earning were pretty mediocre, to say the least...  The year-over-year growth rates for 'old' Google contrinues to decline each quarter, from the low 30's to 27 to 24 to this quarter's 21%.  Nice growth, but a terrible trend...  <br/><br/>And Motorola is going to make that worse, not better - Google's early predictions that the acquisition would be accretive were simply a fantasty...  And I'm not buying 'we've only been there a few weeks, please be patient' answer to analysts' questions about their plans for Motorola - they agreed to this deal last August and closed it in May!  C'mon!  One would think they would have a general idea about what they are going to do with the bloated hardware manufacturer now on their books...  That was a purchase driven by patent protection panic, not strategy...<br/><br/>The stock is experiencing a nice pop, for sure...  'Soaring'?  Hardly.<br/><br/>In the meantime, the advertising machine keeps on humming, generating 97% of their profits, but one-trick ponies usually come up lame eventually...  The billions of Larry and Sergei's playtime R&amp;D money have generated nothing yet that earns a dime for shareholders...<br/><br/>And the Google brand continues to get slightly creepier each year...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> Unlike Microsoft, Google (GOOG +3.1%) is holding onto its post-earnings gains. The Street is taking heart in strong Y/Y paid click growth and a halt to recent ad price declines. However, some are still worried ad prices remain well below year-ago levels, and wish Google provided details about Motorola's full-quarter performance. Deutsche sees rising mobile ad prices and higher shopping-related mobile search activity giving Google a 2H lift. (transcript) </title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/427771?source=feed#comment-7591871</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7591871</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Funny how Google's wants to share the world's information, except, of course, it's own...<br/><br/>Larry Page?  No comment.  Plans for Motorola? No comment.  Sales figures for Nexus 7?  No comment.<br/><br/>Google is the world's most secretive advertising company...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 12:09:17 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Funny how Google's wants to share the world's information, except, of course, it's own...<br/><br/>Larry Page?  No comment.  Plans for Motorola? No comment.  Sales figures for Nexus 7?  No comment.<br/><br/>Google is the world's most secretive advertising company...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Google's Management Discusses Q2 2012 Results - Earnings Call Transcript</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/734491/comments?source=feed#comment-7569651</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7569651</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Wow.  Ignoring Motorola for the moment, which will be a drag on margins and earnings going forward, Google quarterly earnings are pretty much stuck at 2.5-2.8 billion...  Last five quarters of earnings: 2.51, 2,73, 2.71, 2.89, 2.79B...  Where is the earnings growth?  Revenue growth also continues to decline...<br/><br/>Motorola added to revenue, but subtracted from earnings...  Despite Google's earlier assertions, Motorola will clearly not be accretive to earnings...  That was a pipe dream...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:21:28 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Wow.  Ignoring Motorola for the moment, which will be a drag on margins and earnings going forward, Google quarterly earnings are pretty much stuck at 2.5-2.8 billion...  Last five quarters of earnings: 2.51, 2,73, 2.71, 2.89, 2.79B...  Where is the earnings growth?  Revenue growth also continues to decline...<br/><br/>Motorola added to revenue, but subtracted from earnings...  Despite Google's earlier assertions, Motorola will clearly not be accretive to earnings...  That was a pipe dream...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Bank Of America's Report Betrays Uselessness Of Big Bank Earnings Releases</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/729571/comments?source=feed#comment-7534641</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7534641</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I think it's irresponsible of the author to asset that every loan loss reserve release is a 'manipulation' of an earnings report...  What would he say about the huge reserves that were built-up during the financial crisis, that resulted in huge losses for the banks?  Were the banks similarly manipulating their earnings reports, in a suicial manner in order to tank their stocks?<br/><br/>The fact is that loan loss reserves are established based on a set of assumptions regarding the percentage of loans that will go sour.  As non-performing loan portfolios improve, which they are, it is appropriate, rational and reasonable for the banks to release some reserves.  If anything, they are being conservative...<br/><br/>Keep beating up the banks, though!  With Citi and BofA trading at 50-60% of their tangible book value, they are an excellent value...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:45:53 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I think it's irresponsible of the author to asset that every loan loss reserve release is a 'manipulation' of an earnings report...  What would he say about the huge reserves that were built-up during the financial crisis, that resulted in huge losses for the banks?  Were the banks similarly manipulating their earnings reports, in a suicial manner in order to tank their stocks?<br/><br/>The fact is that loan loss reserves are established based on a set of assumptions regarding the percentage of loans that will go sour.  As non-performing loan portfolios improve, which they are, it is appropriate, rational and reasonable for the banks to release some reserves.  If anything, they are being conservative...<br/><br/>Keep beating up the banks, though!  With Citi and BofA trading at 50-60% of their tangible book value, they are an excellent value...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> Three weeks after the launch of iOS versions of Google Chrome (GOOG), the browser accounts for 1.5% of browsing activity on the OS, says ad network Chitika. In addition, it's still ranked #3 on the App Store list of top free iPad downloads (important given the popularity of tablet browsing), and #11 on its list of top free iPhone downloads. Google searches made through Chrome don't require the giant revenue-sharing payments made to Apple for searches conducted via the default Safari browser. </title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/422151?source=feed#comment-7525321</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7525321</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I'm not so sure that Google avoids a commission to Apple on ad clicks using Chrome... As I understand it, Chrome on iOS is just a wrapper over Safari, providing a familiar user interface and synchronization with Safari browsers on other devices (PCs, etc.)... It's still Safari underneath...<br/><br/>Where are the actual facts - rather than speculation - that support the case that Google is getting a free ride?<br/><br/>Apple is pretty hard-core about making sure that nothing is sold on their platform without Apple getting a cut of it... That's why iOS apps are not allowed to link to e-commerce sites for ordering products - you gotta order from within the app, and Apple gets a cut...<br/><br/>Why would they let Google completely escape that business model? I'm not so sure they did...<br/><br/>I tried Chrome, found it less useful than native Safari and uninstalled it... Of course, I don't have other devices with Chrome installed that I want to sync too - other users may value that...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:55:43 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I'm not so sure that Google avoids a commission to Apple on ad clicks using Chrome... As I understand it, Chrome on iOS is just a wrapper over Safari, providing a familiar user interface and synchronization with Safari browsers on other devices (PCs, etc.)... It's still Safari underneath...<br/><br/>Where are the actual facts - rather than speculation - that support the case that Google is getting a free ride?<br/><br/>Apple is pretty hard-core about making sure that nothing is sold on their platform without Apple getting a cut of it... That's why iOS apps are not allowed to link to e-commerce sites for ordering products - you gotta order from within the app, and Apple gets a cut...<br/><br/>Why would they let Google completely escape that business model? I'm not so sure they did...<br/><br/>I tried Chrome, found it less useful than native Safari and uninstalled it... Of course, I don't have other devices with Chrome installed that I want to sync too - other users may value that...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> Apple (AAPL -0.2%) underperforms after Pac Crest's Andy Hargreaves cautions the company could deliver an FQ3 miss on Tuesday due to slowing iPhone sales, and that FQ4 estimates appear too high. Like most analysts voicing such concerns, Hargreaves still expects a huge December quarter thanks to the next iPhone's launch. Multiple analysts defended Apple yesterday. </title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/421551?source=feed#comment-7507041</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7507041</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Some analysts are really dumb...  Particularly those who have tunnel vision about U.S. product release schedules, when in fact more and more of Apple's sales are occuring overseas, including China...  Those markets get the iPhone and iPad later than the U.S...<br/><br/>The prediction of a slowdown based on users waiting for iPhone 5, while still a factor, is less material today because of Apple's rolling schedule of product introductions into different markets...  This is not 2009...<br/><br/>China, in particular, is on fire, and buyers there are not going to wait for the next iPhone5 that they won't see until spring 2013...<br/><br/>I'm always amazed by analysts who seem to talk to each other but  don't seem to read financial statements, SEC fillings, sales figures or Apple's own announcements about product introductions into various markets...<br/><br/>Apple is going to have a solid Q3, their Q4 guidance will be conservative, as always...  The quarter after that, the 2012 holiday quarter, will be off the charts...  Anybody long AAPL going into 2013 will do just fine...  The stock will end this year at $750 minimum...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:30:57 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Some analysts are really dumb...  Particularly those who have tunnel vision about U.S. product release schedules, when in fact more and more of Apple's sales are occuring overseas, including China...  Those markets get the iPhone and iPad later than the U.S...<br/><br/>The prediction of a slowdown based on users waiting for iPhone 5, while still a factor, is less material today because of Apple's rolling schedule of product introductions into different markets...  This is not 2009...<br/><br/>China, in particular, is on fire, and buyers there are not going to wait for the next iPhone5 that they won't see until spring 2013...<br/><br/>I'm always amazed by analysts who seem to talk to each other but  don't seem to read financial statements, SEC fillings, sales figures or Apple's own announcements about product introductions into various markets...<br/><br/>Apple is going to have a solid Q3, their Q4 guidance will be conservative, as always...  The quarter after that, the 2012 holiday quarter, will be off the charts...  Anybody long AAPL going into 2013 will do just fine...  The stock will end this year at $750 minimum...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> "Over time, things have really soured between Siri and me. We barely speak anymore," says the NYT's Nick Bilton, discussing his falling out with Apple's (AAPL) voice-assistant software. Bilton adds the latest version of Google Voice Search (GOOG), an element of Google Now that's found on Android 4.1, is a superior alternative, and others seem to agree. Google has plenty of incentive to deliver a quality rival to Siri, given how it diverts traffic from Google search. (previous: I, II) </title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/417321?source=feed#comment-7444241</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7444241</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[If one evaluates Siri as a voice dictation interface to web search, then absolutely Google Voice Search (GVS) wins...  Obviously, GVS has what Siri does not, which is a connection to Google Search...<br/><br/>It's interesting that the NYT's Nick Bilton says this is what makes GVS 'smarter' than Siri...  In fact, GVS is just a dictation interface...<br/><br/>GVS is, by design and at its peril, trapped in that dictation role.  Ultimately, I would rather have my voice assistant understand local context and my own personal information, and - this is important - show deference to that!  For example, if I ask about someone and that person is in my contact list (or I follow them on Twitter or I'm friends with them on Facebook), that's the information I want first, not a Google search result.  Google cannot make money with that model, hence their single-minded focus on search and paid links; Apple, however, can.  Integration with the universe of apps that customers want and use and their own personal information will ultimately create a superior user experience and larger market opportunity than a dictation interface to Google search...<br/><br/>Is Apple there yet?  No way.  Siri is still clearly beta software, the pace of its improvement is slow, and I don't find it particularly useful (yet).  Its promise as a tool will ultimately depend on how Apple seamlessly integrates its functionality into its mobile platform and the third-party apps running there, as well as its own search capabilities. The API is key.  It's not really about Siri vs. GVS, it's about what those tools are connected to and how they are integrated...<br/><br/>I do believe that Apple is pursuing a much larger opportunity than what Google has done, which is to trap GVS as a front-end to Google Search - basically, make it a dumb dictation machine...  It's actually not 'smart' at all...<br/><br/>Nick Bilton is factually correct but completely misses the larger point...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:38:21 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[If one evaluates Siri as a voice dictation interface to web search, then absolutely Google Voice Search (GVS) wins...  Obviously, GVS has what Siri does not, which is a connection to Google Search...<br/><br/>It's interesting that the NYT's Nick Bilton says this is what makes GVS 'smarter' than Siri...  In fact, GVS is just a dictation interface...<br/><br/>GVS is, by design and at its peril, trapped in that dictation role.  Ultimately, I would rather have my voice assistant understand local context and my own personal information, and - this is important - show deference to that!  For example, if I ask about someone and that person is in my contact list (or I follow them on Twitter or I'm friends with them on Facebook), that's the information I want first, not a Google search result.  Google cannot make money with that model, hence their single-minded focus on search and paid links; Apple, however, can.  Integration with the universe of apps that customers want and use and their own personal information will ultimately create a superior user experience and larger market opportunity than a dictation interface to Google search...<br/><br/>Is Apple there yet?  No way.  Siri is still clearly beta software, the pace of its improvement is slow, and I don't find it particularly useful (yet).  Its promise as a tool will ultimately depend on how Apple seamlessly integrates its functionality into its mobile platform and the third-party apps running there, as well as its own search capabilities. The API is key.  It's not really about Siri vs. GVS, it's about what those tools are connected to and how they are integrated...<br/><br/>I do believe that Apple is pursuing a much larger opportunity than what Google has done, which is to trap GVS as a front-end to Google Search - basically, make it a dumb dictation machine...  It's actually not 'smart' at all...<br/><br/>Nick Bilton is factually correct but completely misses the larger point...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> More on Office 2013: Files are now saved to Microsoft's (MSFT) SkyDrive cloud storage service by default, making them immediately available on mobile apps. Other features include a touch-friendly UI based on Metro, Skype integration, new visualization tools for Excel/PowerPoint, and better push e-mail support for Outlook. No price details for now. Dan Frommer isn't pleased with the lack of iOS app support (for now), and Jonathan S. Geller calls the consumer preview "a hot mess." (live blog) </title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/416891?source=feed#comment-7437461</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7437461</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Sounds great!  When will it ship on an iPad?  :)]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:16:24 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Sounds great!  When will it ship on an iPad?  :)]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Nexus 7 Landed: iPad Now Has A Serious Competitor</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/721911/comments?source=feed#comment-7434361</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7434361</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[The answer about Chromebook pricing is simple: Google doesn't make them nor do they price them.  Samsung does!  And Samsung is not interested in making hardware products in order to break even...<br/><br/>Google, of course, is willing to do that with the Nexus 7 and try to make up for it (like Amazon and the Kindle Fire) with ads and services...<br/><br/>While Google claims its intent is to 'supercharge' its ecosystem, they are actually deliberately killing the Android ecosystem.  Which hardware partners, now, will want to make a 7&quot; tablet to compete with Google's own?  Anyone?  Anyone?  Bueller?<br/><br/>If Google wants to do everything, then it better do everything and abandon the 'ecosystem' folly..  With Google's Motorola purchase and now the Nexus, that is precisely what they are doing...  They just haven't publicly admitted it yet...  But their partners have definitely noticed...<br/><br/>A key question, as you point out, is whether Google can actually become a competent consmer products company, including marketing, sales and support.  So far, they have not demonstrated that...<br/><br/>Meanwhile, Microsoft has the exact same problem with Surface, and the Apple factories and profit machine just keep humming along...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:01:04 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[The answer about Chromebook pricing is simple: Google doesn't make them nor do they price them.  Samsung does!  And Samsung is not interested in making hardware products in order to break even...<br/><br/>Google, of course, is willing to do that with the Nexus 7 and try to make up for it (like Amazon and the Kindle Fire) with ads and services...<br/><br/>While Google claims its intent is to 'supercharge' its ecosystem, they are actually deliberately killing the Android ecosystem.  Which hardware partners, now, will want to make a 7&quot; tablet to compete with Google's own?  Anyone?  Anyone?  Bueller?<br/><br/>If Google wants to do everything, then it better do everything and abandon the 'ecosystem' folly..  With Google's Motorola purchase and now the Nexus, that is precisely what they are doing...  They just haven't publicly admitted it yet...  But their partners have definitely noticed...<br/><br/>A key question, as you point out, is whether Google can actually become a competent consmer products company, including marketing, sales and support.  So far, they have not demonstrated that...<br/><br/>Meanwhile, Microsoft has the exact same problem with Surface, and the Apple factories and profit machine just keep humming along...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Nexus 7 Landed: iPad Now Has A Serious Competitor</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/721911/comments?source=feed#comment-7433761</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7433761</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA['Sold out' without sales volume is meaningless and subject to gaming...<br/><br/>Google is assured of (and experiencing) a pop of enthusiastic early adopter hackers and Googlephiles...  You know, people who like to root their devices...  The uptake among millions of ordinary consumers - who simply want their devices to work - will be quite different...  <br/><br/>The Nexus 7 offers few apps, small content libraries, poor screen and color quality, etc.  To its credit, what is does offer is price.  But the 7&quot; iPad coming in a few months will absolutely crush it, particularly during the holidays.  The vast majority of consumers won't buy something substantially inferior, that their friends don't use and their kids don't like, in order to save $50.  Google is a brilliant engineering company but (so far) a lousy consumer products company...<br/><br/>At the end of 2012, Apple will have sold over 60,000,000 iPads.  Google will have sold no more than 1 million Nexus 7s.  If that makes it 'red hot' or if they 'sell out' in the process, well, fine.  Sales figures are what actually matter...]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:43:44 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA['Sold out' without sales volume is meaningless and subject to gaming...<br/><br/>Google is assured of (and experiencing) a pop of enthusiastic early adopter hackers and Googlephiles...  You know, people who like to root their devices...  The uptake among millions of ordinary consumers - who simply want their devices to work - will be quite different...  <br/><br/>The Nexus 7 offers few apps, small content libraries, poor screen and color quality, etc.  To its credit, what is does offer is price.  But the 7&quot; iPad coming in a few months will absolutely crush it, particularly during the holidays.  The vast majority of consumers won't buy something substantially inferior, that their friends don't use and their kids don't like, in order to save $50.  Google is a brilliant engineering company but (so far) a lousy consumer products company...<br/><br/>At the end of 2012, Apple will have sold over 60,000,000 iPads.  Google will have sold no more than 1 million Nexus 7s.  If that makes it 'red hot' or if they 'sell out' in the process, well, fine.  Sales figures are what actually matter...]]>
      </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
