Seeking Alpha

AndrewEvans01

AndrewEvans01
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View AndrewEvans01's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Google: Too Big To Fail But Should Sell Its Self-Driving Car Operations [View article]
    If you believe Google is a one trick pony because of its ad revenue, I don't think you grasp just just how much of a reach Google has across the internet. Television is mostly monetized by ad spending, but its a multi-billion dollar industry filled with profit, but is highly competitive.

    Imagine if one channel, such as NBC, was the destintation that every viewer went to before deciding what to watch. And NBC got a share of all advertiser spending across half of the entire spectrum of cable and network television channels. Now imagine that advertisers flock to NBC because the ads are as compelling to viewers as the content they are watching, so they see immense return on investment from placing ads on NBC. Now imagine that instead of ad revenue being on the decline for TV/Print, it was actually slated to rise by 20% over the next 5 years, and NBC receives half of all of it.

    Then you'll have an idea about Google's "one trick pony" ad business. Its scale is massive and it has no viable competitor, because its competitors go about monetizing web traffic the wrong way - assuming user data is there to make better ads, not better services. As the internet grows, so does Google. It has a reach of 50% of all ad spending and web traffic.
    Mar 21, 2014. 04:11 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Google: Too Big To Fail But Should Sell Its Self-Driving Car Operations [View article]
    I dont think you truly understand Google and why they do things like Self-Driving Cars. It is not to "maximize shareholder value". They dont care about your portfolio.

    This isn't about money, or how they can profit from it. None of Google's projects ever start with an idea about how to monetize it, regardless of what people may think. They acquire companies because they have good ideas that can scale to levels that no one imagined and they give it away for free because it increases the quality of life or reinvents the way we use the internet to work and live.

    If you're going to scrutinize every Google acquisition and project for its rate of return or profit potential, then you are investing in the wrong company. Google wants to change the world, nothing less, and products that are good and which people become so accustomed to that it completely impacts their daily lives have a way of monetizing themselves in the long run.

    They don't sell ads on everything - they only advertise if it ads value to the product or service. Self-driving cars are being pursued because no one else would do it because they would be looking for how to monetize it - and Google doesn’t care about that.

    Stop trying to analyze Google from an investor's point of view, you will never be right and you will never be satisfied with what they do. It will make no sense to you. Larry Page isn't a Wall Street friendly CEO and he doesnt really care about quarter to quarter returns.

    Dont mean to be blunt/harsh, but too many analysts make the mistake of assuming Google does things for profit. It doesn't. Profit just follows good ideas.
    Mar 21, 2014. 03:50 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sell Google Before It Gets Buried By Competitors [View article]
    As a separate comment, Im probably going to come across as a fanboy, but this type of post is a prime example of the disconnect between Wall Street understanding of Google and Wall Street priorities, versus the reality of how Google actually works and why it does what it does. I dont think Google can be looked at like a traditional stock, and can't be directly compared to Apple and Microsoft, and I dont think you have very strong arguments about its prospects even if it did, below is my rebuttal:

    - Glass will have no competition upon launch, least of all anything from MS or Nokia. It will be so refined and have so much utility that it will take competitors years to make a product even on par with it.

    - Google Maps is not endangered by MS/Nokia in any way. Bing Maps is not compelling or feature rich enough to make consumers move away from Google Maps, especially now that GMaps has Waze local/social real time data. This will have no material impact on Google's current or future prospects.

    - Windows Phone has essentially 0 or negative mind share in the US, and mediocre growth internationally largely driven by Nokia alone, with Microsoft and Windows holding Nokia back from what it could have been had it built on Android and directly competed with Samsung with its strategy of hardware and software differentiation across the price scale. Even with growth internationally, WP fails to give any significant reason for anyone to switch from Android or iOS and will fail to impact Google in any material way. It will always remain a distant #3 barring a set of killer features not offered on Android and developer interest bringing the WP ecosystem up to par - not on the horizon anytime soon.
    - More devices, even WP and iOS = more profit for Google, since its main revenue comes not from device sales but from advertising revenue, which with its most recent focus on mobile+desktop integrated campaigns and modification of pagerank to consider Mobile-accessibility as a ranking criteria, will result in increased mobile and revenue growth.
    - Microsoft didn't need to buy Nokia to have all of the things you claim as a concern, it already had them. So the purchase of Nokia will have no impact on Googles prospects. Smart phones are just one category that Google competes in, and has 80%+ global share. Google ads are all over the internet, so it will profit from each iPhone, Windows Phone, and smart device sold - Google wants the internet to be everywhere and almost everyone uses Google when on the internet, even WP users.
    - Your arguments about "consumer fatigue" with new product launches of the iPhone and Samsung's smart watch, which runs Android, and statements about uncertainty from Samsung and HTC make no sense and don't really explain how Google stands to lose at all. If anything, it will drive OEMs away from MS and toward Android/Chrome OS, which is free and which gets little competition from Google directly.
    - Glass is unlike anything ever released before, and won't be directly competing with the iPhone and "other wearables". Once people see others with it and see what it can do, it will likely sell in droves. In any case, new iPhones and wearables are likely to be used in conjunction with Glass, not instead of it.

    In conclusion, it seems like you really had to stretch for some of these reasons, and it was overall not very convincing. It will be fun to revisit this in 6 months, a year, and 5 years to see how accurate or far off it was.

    My argument on why Google is a buy with tremendous upside: Google is a unique company, and cant be directly compared with Apple and Microsoft, nor Samsung or Nokia. Googles closest direct competiton is Microsoft, only in that the culture of Google and its founders perceieve Microsoft and its products and tactics to be the prime example of how technology was weilded to hold back innovation, and is why Google's motto is "Dont be evil." - many of its products and services were made specifically to break the stranglehold of Microsoft on innovation, and Google has plenty of room for growth in all kinds of established and unestablished industries. Google is an internet provider with a superior product, is a potential auto manufacturer with a revolutionary vehicle, is the dominant search engine and ad network on the entire internet, has the defacto mobile OS worldwide, has the 2nd and 3rd largest social networks (Google+ and YouTube), the dominant video platform on the internet, the dominant geolocation service, and has more on the horizon.

    While the stock will likely have it's ups and downs, it is this generation's Ford, IBM, and General Electric (both figuratively and literally), and will be at the forefront of the Mobile and Internet Economies over the next 2-3 decades, as long as it continues its investment into new industries rather than susbsisting on incremental growth on existing revenue streams and protecting them at the cost of progress like Apple and MSFT are.

    Larry Page could really care less about Wall St, or quarterly profit growth, or meeting Wall Street estimates. He wants a better, more efficient world, and will harness Google to create his idea of the future in whatever way he can. If you invest in Google, you are investing in that philosophy and understanding that Google builds first, and worries about monetization later. When it comes to considering why to take an action, Shareholder/Wall St expectations are never a factor, even if they don't say so publically.

    For this reason, your reasoning is based on flawed logic and shows that you don't understand the company you're recommending a sell on. People should buy Google because they share its vision, not because of an analyst recommendation.

    Now, before you write me off as a fanboy, this is all what I have learned from studying Google history, culture, and leadership and whether you agree with me or not, is a much better assessment of Google's prospects than typical shaky Wall St reasoning. Go ahead and sell the stock if you want, I'm investing in the future.
    Sep 9, 2013. 10:43 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sell Google Before It Gets Buried By Competitors [View article]
    Google is not Apple. It will not grow profits significantly by releasing hardware with an insane profit margin. It will not grow by releasing marginal iterations of its products and tapping consumer wallets with the same product just slightly better year after year. If you think this and expect profit growth through device sales to even be marginally part of Larry Page's thinking, you will be disappointed and you should go find another stock.

    Google wants to create the future of humanity. Larry Page wants moon shots, not incremental profit growth. It wants products, services, and ideas so crazy it will change lives and the way humanity thinks and acts.

    The possibilities for Google are endless. If you are looking at short term (within 5 years) profits, Google will achieve that, but you can find larger profits elsewhere.

    If you believe that Google can build a product or service so revolutionary that it has no competitors because the product/service doesn't exist yet, then Google is a buy.

    Google brings in enough profit from its existing products that it is a buy without considering Glass at all. But if you look at Glass, Fiber, Loon, Driverless Cars, and other Google products as a whole, they are easily the most innovative company of our generation and can only go up.
    Sep 9, 2013. 09:26 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Undervalued Stock Of The Week: Himax Technologies [View article]
    Anyone denying or still skeptical of Himax powering Google Glass should reseach Karl Guttag. He isn't just some random SA commenter - he's an expert in microdisplays. Competitors offering AMOLED displays or newer technologies aren't going to be able to provide the cost/value that LCOS provides. Google isn't going to sell this at $1500 - think more in the $199-399 range.

    Google isn't Apple and they arent going to sell this for a 40%+ profit margin. The location and search data they are going to get from real-time Glass searches are going to give Google something they've never been able to get off of just indexing Images on the internet - context.

    Google stock isn't the best way to play the release of Glass - Himax is. Glass device sales are going to be a drop in the bucket to revenues, the real value is going to be unlocked through the information and targeted advertising opportunities Glass will provide. Himax is going to get $10-$30 a share (estimated based on Chinese and Hong Kong

    I think users are looking for a way they can stay connected but not have to have their face buried in their phone 24/7. Even people who aren't tech enthusiasts (or Google fans) that normally see this as a geeky device have been asking me about it and when it's coming out.

    This is going to be the next iPhone and people don't even see it. It is going to be the next revolution of mobile computing. And Himax is going to be taken along for the ride. :)

    Disclosure: I am long HIMX with a relatively small investment, and I am not a professional investor. I may be adding to my position within the next 72 hours. I do not have an open position in GOOG or AAPL and have no plans to initiate one.
    Jun 24, 2013. 09:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    The blogosphere is reviewing a prototype that they paid $1500 for and was released specifically to get feedback from highly connected tech media who test mobile devices for a living, from influential public figures, from high profile developers, and people that can look past using a prototype in ways Google didn't necessarily anticipate so that they can address those concerns before the final product is released.

    This isn't the same as reviewing a final product, which given the components can be produced at scale and sold in the much more reasonable range of a midrange smartphone ($199-399, which is similar to their Nexus devices).

    Reviewing a prototype at a $1500 price point that they paid for vs. a $200-300 version that will launch with their issues addressed and robust developer support from major developers will yield a different result.

    Ultimately, since it runs on Android on smartphone specs from nearly one to two years ago (similar to iPhone 4S, Galaxy S2, Galaxy Nexus), it will run smoothly since it isn't pushing a bunch of pixels or heavy multitasking, and can be priced to sell briskly without necessarily needing to be a loss leader.
    Jun 19, 2013. 02:16 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    The average person wanting to take a photo or video of their child's first time riding a bike, first steps, or other scenario that would be better without holding a cell phone or camera isn't going to mind wearing Glass.

    The average person driving and wanting to change a Music Track, search for directions to where they're going, and initiate a Voice call, Text, or Hangout to let someone know they're on their way in a manner safer and less distracting than messing with their phone or in car GPS isn't going to mind using Glass.

    A traveler needing to translate a street sign or phrase into their language or vice versa without fumbling through apps on their phone isn't going to mind using Glass.

    A person wanting to instantly search for nearby Restaurants and get quick results with Zagat reviews that will give them walking directions without needing to touch their phone isn't going to mind using Glass.

    A mechanic under a car who is using both hands to work that needs to research instructions or reference images to help him complete repairs won't mind using Glass.

    An average teenage girl wanting another way to take and post pictures to Instagram that they can accessorize with interchangeable lenses and colored frames isn't going to mind using Glass. (I asked - her response was "That would be bad ass".)

    Its slightly more noticeable than a Bluetooth headset but isn't any worse than a set of high end over the ear headphones that has hundreds of use cases and much higher utility than either. These are just scratching the surface.

    In each of your assertions about how no one will want Glass, you haven't offered any type of proof that a majority of people share your opinion. I don't think it looks bad at all, but even if that were a concern, the frames are modular and lenses are interchangeable and we will likely see an accessory market spring up around this device.

    But that's fine, I'll keep adding to my position while the price is low, and when the FCC filings are released from confidentiality at the end of this month, pricing gets released, and sales take off, I'll be happily paying for my pair with Himax stock. :)
    Jun 19, 2013. 01:51 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    Sorry, meant to add that I expect pricing will be similar to the Nexus line at $199-$299. Nothing in Glass is so expensive that would warrant a huge price, and the data that Google will get with mass adoption is more valuable in the long run than a high profit margin in device sales. I doubt it will be sold at a loss, but they want consumers to use this in high numbers because the data is more valuable for long term monetization than the one time profit from the device sale.
    Jun 19, 2013. 12:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    It uses bone conduction for the audio. There is no ear piece. I think you hit the nail right on the head.

    It also allows easy texting, radio tuning, Navigation, and voice calls while driving that does not take the users eyes off the road to fiddle with a car stereo or phone.

    With the components they have, it's comparable to a low mid range smartphone and considering it isn't driving as much graphically and task wise as a phone would, there isn't a significant performance hit. It offloads the heavy processing work to the phone and is compatible with both iOS and Android, although obviously much greater with Android.

    I'll revisit this thread a year after Glass goes public, just to see how predictions fared. People who dismiss this appear to either be shorting the stock (Himax or Google), Apple or Ms fans that are biased against Google and dismiss anything from Google anyway, or don't understand the technology and are only considering its utility at launch and not giving enough weight to the hundreds of use cases that developers will build out.
    Jun 19, 2013. 12:51 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    I don't know what specific micro display technology you're referring to. If you can name a manufacturer and technology that can produce an HD microdisplay in mass quantities, likely millions, that isn't subject to supply disruptions and do their own fabrication at a $10-30 per unit cost, please share.

    In any case, with mobile tech you can't just swap out a component as important as the display on the turn on a dime because the firmware and drivers are programmed to exact specifications. All the other components that are sourced have drivers specifically configured to interact with that specific display. They would have to program everything from the ground up and the development cycle often takes months or up to a year on a product release. The components aren't modular. If Himax is building the display in the Explorer version, there is little chance of anyone else being selected this close to release without risking the display being incompatible with the other components.

    There comes a point where extra resolution is negligible or wasted at a certain distance from your eye. If you hold a 720p display and a 1080p display on a smart phone 3 inches from your face, the pixel density and viewable information will be indistinguishable.

    However, unlike a smartphone the distance Glass will be from your eye is fixed, not variable, so a higher resolution won't make a difference. It already is equivalent to a 25'' HDTV 8 feet away with the current display it has now.

    Its perfectly acceptable for something that isn't meant to monopolize your field of vision. It is meant to complement what you're seeing, not drown it out. A higher resolution would cost more and not deliver an added benefit, and a newer technology would likely be cost prohibitive to producing at scale.

    Karl Guttag is a very well known expert in this field and specifically on LCOS and other micro display technologies. There are very few companies who can produce this type of display at scale and if Google prices this like its Nexus devices in the $199-$399 range (which seems reasonable and likely when looking at the components), it has very high potential to sell in high volumes. Add the lack of because competing products from Apple or elsewhere and none on the horizon and that it will work across Android AND iOS and you have the recipe for huge sales numbers.

    I still haven't seen a compelling argument as to why, specifically, Glass will fail. Everyone I ask is excited about it and it's a great alternative to using your phone for GPS or texting while driving as your eyes are still on the road and it's no more dangerous than having a conversation, especially with Google Hangouts being enhanced to handle voice and SMS alongside video. That alone makes it a steal.
    Jun 18, 2013. 11:57 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    Based on what? They haven't released a price yet nor has development started on a large scale.
    Jun 18, 2013. 10:03 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    There are parallels between the original iPhone and Glass. The iPhone was not an immediate success and was largely panned by competitors and critics. It initially launched with a combination of technologies not entirely new but new in that specific form factor. It had a high price point compared to other devices and had relatively limited functionality (no 3rd party apps) compared to competing smartphones (like Palm and BlackBerry).

    When Apple expanded the ecosystem and opened the app store, and AT&T subsidized the cost, its utility, function, and entertainment value skyrocketed, and with no competition it became a must have device, and a robust accessory ecosystem sprung up around it.

    Glass has all of these things going for it except that it won't be a year before developers release applications for it, and it is unlikely that any OEM will be able to release a similar product in such a short period of time.

    If Google prices it right, developers will increase its functionality and it can be customized with any number of different frames and lenses with no competing products readily available that have the level of developer support that Glass will have. If you are basing your opinion that it will fail on just how the Explorer version looks and operates, you are assuming that it is a static product that won't change or increase in features after it is released, which is not the case.

    Just because you say things like 'The iPhone was highly desirable, this isn't' doesn't make them true. It didn't become highly desirable Immediately on launch, it only did so once the price was affordable and its utility was expanded by third parties. The lack of any comparable product made it the only choice.

    The same thing will happen with Glass.

    Besides, Bluetooth headsets still sell, they look worse and do less. Google isn't going to price this so high that it won't succeed, and the drop from $1500 and limited availability to a more reasonable price and mass market availability will increase the perception that consumers are getting a highly desirable product at a discount.
    Jun 18, 2013. 09:54 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    You aren't always looking into it. You have to look slightly up to see notifications and such. I surmise there may be some eyestrain but not anymore so than staring at a smartphone or monitor all day long.

    Besides, its not like people will be wearing them 24/7.
    Jun 17, 2013. 10:37 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    You don't need super high resolution with something that close to your eye. Plus, a lower resolution LCOS as opposed to Amoled or other higher resolution micro displays would allow much lower cost and easier mass market applications. Margins would be much higher than AMOLED, which at that size/scale/use case is comparatively much more expensive and difficult to manufacture.
    Jun 17, 2013. 10:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Integrated circuit expert and SA contributor Karl Guttag has conclusive proof that Himax (HIMX) microdisplays are being used in Google Glass (GOOG). Shares of Himax (HIMX) are down more than 28% since May 31 after Google Glass teardowns revealed no Himax logo[View news story]
    Thats a rather bold claim about a product that isn't fully public yet, hasn't been priced, and is still in the beginning of its life as a platform and has significant interest from both the tech industry, investors, and consumers alike.

    The bottom line is that its success isn't going to be determined before it is released or even in the first week or month of sales. Once it grows as a platform and use cases that you, I, or Google havent considered become available will it be something that can be judged as a success or failure.

    Anecdotally, I know people who are average non-tech enthusiast consumers that would grab it if priced right just for the camera features alone. It can interact with both Android and iOS, so it won't be limited solely to Android users (although iOS won't have full functionality).

    If you look solely at what has been demonstrated from the Explorer program and completely ignore it's potential as a platform (which is already attracting developer interest), you're digging yourself into an incredibly narrow minded view. That is entirely within your right, but don't mistake your personal feelings towards Glass as the definitive outlook of consumers.

    Time will prove one of us right.
    Jun 17, 2013. 10:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
30 Comments
69 Likes