When you look at this from a value chain perspective, new players are entering at the device and the content points of the value chain. There are no new entrants coming in to compete with the telecoms. The value added for any new offering is coming from the user interface of the device and the ability to get new content. The wireless infrastructure connecting the content with the devices seems to be less and less of a factor for many consumers and there doesn't seem to be a lot of incentives in this area to attract new players to compete with the AT&Ts and Verizons of the world. Soon I see wireless plans being more of a commodity. The wireless protocol or company will matter very little to the consumer. Price will become the main factor in determining the wireless company a consumer uses. The devices and the content you can get to on it will be the main attractions to most consumers. It seems to me Apple and Google understand this very well.
I think IBM will buy SUN. IBM just announced this week they are going to open up one of the largest software campuses in Massachusetts http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/marke twire/0289865.htm. IBM's new location will be only a few miles from SUN's Burlington, MA headquarters.
Good point. If you want to have an advantage over your competitors you need to specialize in "something". If your company specializes in "something", then you need a workforce that also specializes in that same "something". If you don't need to train them to specialize in that "something" and you can just hire people who specialize in that "something" then so can your competitors....and there goes your competitive advantage.
In other words, you need to train your employees or you will loose your competitive advantage.
If the web 1.0 bubble ended up with the winning concept being "brick and mortar", maybe the winning concept of the web 2.0 bubble will be "web 2.0 and mortar".
... Now we have web2.0 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web2.0)I guess web1.0 was the checkout feature and now web2.0 is the wiki, social networking, customization, blogs, and more. Websites are now appearing that are web2.0 businesses. Myspace, wikipedia, igoogle and other sites are set to be the next thing. These technologies are not necessarily profitable but companies are paying big money to buy them up for fear of missing the web2.0 boat (the purchases of friendster and youtube come to mind). But what if the conclusion of web1.0 turns out to be the proper conclusion of web2.0? What if the profitable outcome of these web2.0 business models is not just to create a website but to incorporate the features of web2.0 into a physical store. We can call it "web2.0 and mortar" or "wiki and mortar".
Could web2.0 move to the real world? Could the experience I have when I walk into Wal-Mart be different for me that for you? Could the isle next to the milk be coffee for me but cereal for my wife? Probably not. But I can see large communities of people change the how a store operates or what it sells? a wikistore? Stores are constantly doing market research to find out what their customers want. Why not just let them define it for the store. Customers logon to the stores website and edit the wiki-inventory and add and remove new items.
Re:Cell providers are the problem, not the phone
on
Inside Apple's iPhone
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately, in the US the cellular phone providers force phone manufactures to remove features from the phone that will allow users to upload/download data from the phone unless it goes though the wireless network. It's a virtual tollbooth for all data. You can buy a phone directly from the manufacture, but the phones are much cheaper when you buy them from the cellular provider.
Most likely this will change soon as these cellular companies are facing more and more pressures from consumers and manufactures to change their ways.
So having an Engineering degree, a Master's in Computer Science, and working on an MBA, I must be a big cheater!...Or is everyone in my courses cheating off of me???
The greatest thing that can happen to a brand is becoming the leader. I agree with that. But, being the leader and still "holding on" to the brand name is better than loosing control of the name.
When customers can no longer differentiate one product, the leader, from the others, then the others can use promotions, lower prices, make agreements with resellers, etc to take market share from the leader.
When customers know the difference from one product, the leader, from the others, then the leader can use this difference to show why the customer wants its product more than the others and the company can keep its market share.
Its about staying in the lead. Not just about getting in the lead.
When a company markets their product/Brand they are trying to explain to the target customers why their product is better that the competition in the same product category. If a company's brandname becomes the description for the entire product category, then their marketing efforts are no longer effective in differentiating their product from the others.
Google's marketing message to customers: Google is a better way to search the internet. Customers: Great! So when I Google stuff on MSN.com its better!!
Well if Disney (ABC) buys Pixar that would make Steve Jobs the largest share holder of Disney and give Steve Jobs a seat on Disney's board. I bet there will be more content on iTunes if that is to happen. I also wonder how that will play into Apples home entertainment system.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&si d=a9UW8SKESpVU&refer=us
Ok so I like the idea of a portable player that can plug into my car stereo or my home stereo. It plays all the songs I like. Great so I get an Ipod. But I don't have the time to listen to new music (through some other means other than my IPod), write down the artist name, go online and download the song to my ipod. I just don't have the time and therefore my IPod's playlist is not that great. So I looked into satellite radio, but found out that it will not work (I have head phones), when I'm at work inside a building, or in my car going through the big dig tunnel in Boston. I also will have to listen to someone else's playlist.
But wait! What if I had a portable radio that did both. It worked indoors like an Ipod, it played music from a playlist like satellite radio! This is what Cingular is doing with this service. But it gets better! This service's play list will be controlled from a server that knows who I am, NOT from a satellite that is just broadcasting a signal.
In the future the cellular providers will be able to let customers customize this service. Play only songs from these artists, play new songs of this type of music, play only these songs, don't play that song again, play the stuff I want to listen to. This is why this is much bigger and better than the Ipod and satellite radio.
Slashdot Mirror
When you look at this from a value chain perspective, new players are entering at the device and the content points of the value chain. There are no new entrants coming in to compete with the telecoms. The value added for any new offering is coming from the user interface of the device and the ability to get new content. The wireless infrastructure connecting the content with the devices seems to be less and less of a factor for many consumers and there doesn't seem to be a lot of incentives in this area to attract new players to compete with the AT&Ts and Verizons of the world. Soon I see wireless plans being more of a commodity. The wireless protocol or company will matter very little to the consumer. Price will become the main factor in determining the wireless company a consumer uses. The devices and the content you can get to on it will be the main attractions to most consumers. It seems to me Apple and Google understand this very well.
I think IBM will buy SUN. IBM just announced this week they are going to open up one of the largest software campuses in Massachusetts http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/marke twire/0289865.htm. IBM's new location will be only a few miles from SUN's Burlington, MA headquarters.
I don't get this article. Just uses the WSDL, it will explain exactly how to use it. no research needed.
Good point. If you want to have an advantage over your competitors you need to specialize in "something". If your company specializes in "something", then you need a workforce that also specializes in that same "something". If you don't need to train them to specialize in that "something" and you can just hire people who specialize in that "something" then so can your competitors. ...and there goes your competitive advantage.
In other words, you need to train your employees or you will loose your competitive advantage.
Sheeleytech talks about this exact idea of "web 2.0 and mortar" http://www.sheeleytech.com/2007/07/web20andmortar. html
From the post
Great post! http://www.sheeleytech.com/2007/07/web20andmortar. html
Most likely this will change soon as these cellular companies are facing more and more pressures from consumers and manufactures to change their ways.
This is also great news for Granny Smiths!
I know other sites do the same, but I think this was critical when the masses came to their site, for the reasons Anonymous Coward stated.http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=201 287&cid=16496747/
They were able to look through the site and not feel like they had to close the shades and lock the doors.
Having this policy also made the site more appealing to google and other large companies that cannot have their name directly associated with porn.
So having an Engineering degree, a Master's in Computer Science, and working on an MBA, I must be a big cheater! ...Or is everyone in my courses cheating off of me???
The greatest thing that can happen to a brand is becoming the leader. I agree with that. But, being the leader and still "holding on" to the brand name is better than loosing control of the name.
When customers can no longer differentiate one product, the leader, from the others, then the others can use promotions, lower prices, make agreements with resellers, etc to take market share from the leader.
When customers know the difference from one product, the leader, from the others, then the leader can use this difference to show why the customer wants its product more than the others and the company can keep its market share.
Its about staying in the lead. Not just about getting in the lead.
When a company markets their product/Brand they are trying to explain to the target customers why their product is better that the competition in the same product category. If a company's brandname becomes the description for the entire product category, then their marketing efforts are no longer effective in differentiating their product from the others.
Google's marketing message to customers: Google is a better way to search the internet.
Do you see the problem now?Customers: Great! So when I Google stuff on MSN.com its better!!
Well if Disney (ABC) buys Pixar that would make Steve Jobs the largest share holder of Disney and give Steve Jobs a seat on Disney's board. I bet there will be more content on iTunes if that is to happen. I also wonder how that will play into Apples home entertainment system. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&si d=a9UW8SKESpVU&refer=us
you keep doing that
The IPod + satellite radio = Cellular radio
Ok so I like the idea of a portable player that can plug into my car stereo or my home stereo. It plays all the songs I like. Great so I get an Ipod. But I don't have the time to listen to new music (through some other means other than my IPod), write down the artist name, go online and download the song to my ipod. I just don't have the time and therefore my IPod's playlist is not that great. So I looked into satellite radio, but found out that it will not work (I have head phones), when I'm at work inside a building, or in my car going through the big dig tunnel in Boston. I also will have to listen to someone else's playlist.
But wait! What if I had a portable radio that did both. It worked indoors like an Ipod, it played music from a playlist like satellite radio! This is what Cingular is doing with this service. But it gets better! This service's play list will be controlled from a server that knows who I am, NOT from a satellite that is just broadcasting a signal.
In the future the cellular providers will be able to let customers customize this service. Play only songs from these artists, play new songs of this type of music, play only these songs, don't play that song again, play the stuff I want to listen to. This is why this is much bigger and better than the Ipod and satellite radio.