ImaginativePRO Blog

AUGMENTED REALITY (AR): WHAT IT IS, FAD OR REALITY, WHO IS USING IT, WHAT'S THE ROI, USING AR IN YOUR DIGITAL MARKETING

 

Augmented reality -- that's just one of the latest marketing catchphrases, right?

The traditional definition of augmented reality, or AR, refers to the overlay of digital information on a live video feed. If you've watched an NFL game on TV and have seen the superimposed 10 yard, first-down line, that's AR. AR has also started to encompass other areas such as gestural control and motion capture. Microsoft's Kinect is one example of gestural control where you see yourself in the actual game on TV and interact with it by movement and gestures.

Click Image To Enlarge

What isn't augmented reality?

AR is not virtual reality or Second Life 2.0. AR at its most basic form is using digital to enhance your real-world user interfaces and experiences. All you're doing is "augmenting" your viewable surroundings with digital information.

Click Image To Enlarge

What brands are using AR?

While many brands such as GE, Nestle, Lego and others have been using AR, there are certain brands and products for which AR might not be a good fit. Don't force AR onto your product if it doesn't seem like a natural fit, and think through the consumer experience.

Click Image To Enlarge

What's the ROI of AR?

Don't count on measuring its "click-through rate." As with any emerging technology, there's the question of ROI and how to measure it, and you're likely to have different measures depending on the program and the goals of the program. For example, AR can be used to enhance product training, and you might measure its success by whether it increases user satisfaction with the product. For marketing, there are already signs that AR has increased awareness and engagement for certain product campaigns. In addition, AR can be used to increase purchase conversions in e-commerce and drive purchase intent at retail.

Click Image To Enlarge

How does AR fit into my digital planning?

When using any digital technology or media, it's important to develop your digital strategy first. Why do you want to use AR? What are your objectives? Are you planning for engagement, awareness, etc.? If you're unclear on how AR can be used effectively, contact an AR company or specialist that can help you develop a proper strategy. Using AR solely for a PR play won't work anymore.

Click Image To Enlarge

So is it just a fad or here to stay?

Like every emerging medium, there is hype around a new technology that often outpaces the current technology's limitations. Mobile AR is one area right now where the limitations of mobile technology don't match brand or consumer expectations for mobile AR. Forrester recently released a report on the mobile-AR ecosystem and uncovered similar findings -- that mobile AR isn't ready yet. It also found that web- and kiosk-based AR are much more mature and more practical right now for a brand's AR initiatives. Naturally, as a company that specializes in AR, we believe AR is here to stay.

Click Image To Enlarge

Wait, what's with the different kinds of AR -- web, kiosk and mobile?

Yes, there are three types:

WEB-BASED AR

Uses a consumer's PC and webcam to offer an enhanced experience often via a marker, image or through motion capture.

Examples: GE's Plug Into the Smart Grid is a great example of web-based augmented reality. This online execution allowed users to hold up a piece of paper -- called a "marker" -- to their computer's webcam and see themselves holding an animated model of a smart grid on the screen. There's also the Fashionista dressing-room app we created for online fashion boutique Tobi, which lets you "virtually" try on clothing items using your webcam and a marker on a printed piece of paper. Once you've "tried on" the outfit you want to see yourself in, you can send the image to friends via social media and ask them for tier opinion.

Pros: It delivers the greatest global reach for AR, especially when using Flash, as it doesn't use a plug-in or download, it's generally lower cost, and social media can easily be integrated.

Cons: You have to develop for minimum PC requirements, and it requires the user to have a webcam.

KIOSK-BASED AR

Is similar to web-based AR, but often runs more powerful AR applications using 3D or facial tracking.

Example: At a store in downtown Orlando, shoppers can hold up a boxed Lego set to an in-store kiosk, and the kiosk will show an image of them holding the kit as it looks when put together.

Pros: Kiosk AR can leverage multiple processors --more powerful than the typical at-home PC -- for multiple uses, such as out-of-home or point-of-purchase marketing. It also doesn't require a user to create a marker or have a webcam.

Cons: Higher cost, fixed location, usually no internet access.

MOBILE AR

Uses the viewfinder on a mobile phone to show enhanced digital information in your surroundings.

Examples: The iButterfly app, created in Japan by Dentsu, lets you track and find digital butterflies using your iPhone GPS and camera. Hold your iPhone camera up at appointed spots and when you look at your surroundings through the camera, you'll see animated butterflies flapping by. Each iButterfly contains coupons for nearby businesses. In another example, World Lens lets you use your smartphone to translate printed words. Hold the camera phone up to a sign in Spanish and it'll translate it to English.

Pros: Mobile AR can leverage location, and smartphone adoption is rising, increasing its potential reach.

Cons: You're dealing with a fragmented development environment, as some smartphones run on the iOS platform, others on Android and still others on Windows or Blackberry; and limited processing power and battery life can be restrictive. Additionally, there can be user-interface/user-experience issues and the hype around this type of AR is out of control.

Where can I find AR companies?

Though AR is a relatively new technology, some companies have been building software and innovating in the space for awhile. There's even an AR Consortium that lists many of the players in the industry.

In addition, there's an annual AR event called ARE that's held in Santa Clara, Calif., and features many, if not all, of the major AR companies. It specifically focuses on business, marketing and technology tracks and issues at hand for the AR industry. There is also an exhibit hall where AR companies show off their latest technology.

What are some AR words and phrases I need to know?

• Facial tracking: Webcam can track the face for object placement and orientation.
• Facial Recognition: Webcam can detect the face and in some cases, recognize the user (Gender, age, etc.)
• Marker: Black-and-white image that resembles a QR code. This is used so the webcam can recognize size and positioning of the asset in relation to the webcam.
• Image recognition: Using an image (i.e., packaging or logo) that the webcam and software can recognize and identify in lieu of the marker. Example: Google Goggles.
• Motion capture: The webcam can detect areas where movement occurs.
• Gestural control: More advanced than motion capture where the system can identify the body and gestures. Example: Microsoft Kinect.
• Natural user interface (NUI): Term used to identify the evolution of the mouse/keyboard input to natural gestures and interaction with a computer. Think "Minority Report" and "Iron Man 2." And with 8 million Kinects sold in two months, Generation Y and Z are now starting to interact with computers through the NUI. As some of us old geezers (Gen X and baby boomers) are just getting accustomed to touchpad interfaces, the younger generations are already getting primed on the next human-to-computer interaction evolution.

 Courtesy of an article dated February 27, 2011 appearing in Advertising Age

A TEN STEP MARKETING GUIDE AND SOME WITTY TRICKS, IDEAS AND TACTICS TO INCREASE YOUR TWITTER FOLLOWING

Click to follow me on Twitter

It's important to remember that chasing numbers can be futile, since even those with envied Twitter followings may not have as many followers as the numbers indicate they do. Even so, the first thing many people do when they hear of a name, a company or a brand is search for it on Google and Twitter, so there are benefits to a robust following, especially if they are organic and engaged.

1. Tweet about stuff you know and love. Your passion and expertise will show and people will recognize it.

2. Make sure your Twitter account name reflects who you are and what you do. For those whose name isn't a brand in its own right (like, um, @irinaslutsky), pick one that's short and to the point. When third generation NYC journalist Jonathan Mandell decided to tweet about theater, he picked @newyorktheater.

3. Related to No. 2, make sure you fill out the bio that shows up under your account name.In case your name is your account name, put your city and description.

4. Follow people. Yes, some of them will follow you back and many won't, but to participate in the Twitter economy, follow. This goes for individuals and companies.

5. Read other people's tweets and ask questions, clarifications and followups. If you're a company, take the complaints offline -- but take them for sure.

6. Unless you're @nytimes or @cnn, don't just hose us with links to your stuff. Throw in observations, funny things you see during the day. Go ahead and break the unofficial rule and tweet what you're having for lunch once in a while. Because someone's going to say they also had a $5 footlong. And that someone could be your next big client.

7. Don't link and run. Even when you post links to your work and intersperse them with links to things you find interesting, stick around for the discussion. Attend to everyone who messages you and especially those who @ you. People remember if they didn't get a response.

8. Tweet consistently. Nothing is more depressing than looking up an account with one tweet from 2010 and two from 2009. Total. (Hi, @redlobster.) Hire someone!

9. If you hire someone to tweet for you or your brand, make sure you trust them. Because if you trust them, they'll be able to have a personality.

10. Remember the Murphy's Law of Twitter is (thanks to @kevinmarks) that being retweeted gets you more followers, but tweeting loses them. So be sure to say things that get retweeted!

COMMENTARY:   I would also add to this list:

1. Don't tweet about the same thing.  Breakaway with other interesting topics.
2. Shock them with something spectacular and different.  I always use: TURK'S SHOCKING TWEET as my headline lead in.
3. Throw them for a curve with a cool joke or anecdote.
4. Interject some humor into your tweets.
5. Go the other way.  It's OK to disagree with established beliefs.  
6. ADD links back to your website or the article you are tweeting about.
7. Attach interesting photos.  The cornier and funnier the better.
8. Don't forget to use @mention to highlight your favorite fans.
9. Don't forget those hashtags.  They are picked up during searches and can lead them back to your Twitter page, and get you a new fan.
10. Use bribery if you have to.    
11. If you have a blog or website, don't forget a convenient FOLLOW ME button to your Twitter page.

Courtesy of an article dated February 27, 2011 appearing in Advertising Age

INFOGRAPHIC: HOW MALE AND FEMALE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DIFFER WHEN CLOSING BIG REAL ESTATE SALES

Nicolas Cage's $9.5 million mansion in Las Vegas went into bank foreclosure in 2010 and sold for $4.2 million

-

No one believes that men and women are the same. And a fascinating data set reveals how they might approach real estate deals differently.

We all know that men and women approach most everything in life slightly differently--and sometimes, wildly differently. How does this affect the way they each do business?

Rarely do you get a data set that reveals much about that question, but here's a remarkable one from the data-viz wizards over at Trulia, the real estate listings website. They took a look at the gender balance between real estate agents across the country, and the results are pretty remarkable.

The first thing to note is that real estate, in general, is a woman-dominated field; on average, in every state in the country, the ration of men to women approaches 2:1. Now, you can hypothesize about all sorts of reasons why that is; for example, perhaps women come off as more trustworthy to women and less threatening to men, each of which can make all the difference in a life-defining purchase such as a home. Or perhaps women, with their edge in intuition and empathy, simply make better sales people. Or perhaps the dominance of women is about sociological pressures: Real estate, historically, might have been a more amendable profession to the demands of balancing worklife and child rearing, and one avenue where women never had their career advancement limited by their sex, since the profession is filled with free agents.

All of these are worth keeping in mind as we get into the data. Because the fascinating thing is that while women dominate the field, men tend to put up a greater number of houses for sale, while women put more expensive houses for sale. Here is what the state-by-state breakdown looks like for numbers of houses put up by men vs. women:

Click To View Interactive Map

As the chart shows, in most states across the U.S., the average male real estate agent puts up at least 5-14% more houses for sale than his female counterpart; in many states, such as Nevada, Oregon, and Minnesota, male real estate agents usually put over 25% more houses on the market.

Meanwhile, here is what the chart looks like when you look at the average prices of homes listed by women vs. men:

Click To View Interactive Map

The relationship is totally flipped. Women tend to sell houses that are markedly more expensive than those sold by men, and the trend is, in fact, even more intense across all states.

This is amazing data, and it's fun to think about what's driving it. Perhaps it takes a "high-touch" selling approach to sell more expensive homes--one which suits women more. And perhaps men adjust to their lower commissions simply by increasing the volume of their sales. Men may be great in increasing the volume of sales simply because they sell differently: Emphasizing relative prices and the market and data, perhaps. A more analytical approach, of course, would probably yield a quicker sale, since it's less about getting people to stretch a little for a more perfect home and more about a very straightforward comparison of data. (For anyone who wants to accuse me of sexism or gender stereotyping, I can list many, many studies that show that men, for example, make more buying decisions based on data while women emphasize personal connections.)

At the very least, you can surmise that the differences you see above are unlikely to be accidents. Whatever is driving them, they're more likely a function of men and women using their different strengths to approach sales differently.

COMMENTARY:   Its not too difficult why female real estate brokers would book listings with higher prices than males.  First, they outnumber the males.   Second, they know how to flirt with more affluent male sellers to get that listing.  Female sellers, are more likely to trust a female broker than a male.   Still, you need the interpersonal skills and knowledge of real estate to close a new listing and sell the home.  

Courtesy of an article dated October 25, 2011 appearing in Fast Company Design

DUTCH DESIGNERS CREATE INTIMACY 2.0, A SUPER-SEXY, E-DRESS THAT BECOMES SEE-THROUGH WHEN THE WEARER GETS TURNED-ON

The Intimacy 2.0 hyper-sexy e-dress by Dutch designer Studio Roosegaarde

Granted, it takes a mountain of courage to wear.

For ladies who don’t have the patience for coy flirtation, here’s something that gets the job done quickly: a sensor-enabled cocktail dress that flashes a whole lot of skin the more excited you get.

 

So say you meet some guy who sends your heart aflutter. The dress responds to your elevated pulse by growing transparent around the (already plenty skimpy) plunging neckline. Conversely, if he’s such a snooze that you’re about two seconds away from flat-lining, the dress stays opaque, sending an instant “no, thanks!”

Click Images To Enlarge

Intimacy 2.0 is latest in a series of hyper-sexy e-dresses from the techie Dutch designers Studio Roosegaarde in collaboration with V2_Lab and fashion designer Anouk Wipprecht. Each dress combines embedded sensors and conductive “smart foils” that become see-through when zapped by electricity. But whereas previous iterations would’ve landed you in jail for indecent exposure (one dress went transparent simply by being around other people and covered less than a pastie), Intimacy 2.0 is designed to be flaunted outside of the bedroom. It's still pretty damned racy, though. Big up to anyone who's daring enough to wear it. The rest of us will have to stick to batting our eyelashes.

The secret to the Intimacy 2.0 e-dress is the technology underneath that reacts to the sensual mood of the wearer.  

Click Images To Enlarge

Dresses are available in black or white on custom order through Studio Roosegaarde. More info here.

Click Image To Enlarge

COMMENTARY:   The Intimacy 2.0 e-dress is from out-of-this world.  I do hope that see-through e-dresses are the next big thing in fashion.   I truly expect Lady Gaga to add one to her dress collection.

Courtesy of an article dated October 24, 2011 appearing in Fast Company Design 

 

CAN NEST LABS AND ITS NEW 'NEST LEARNING THERMOSTAT' DISRUPT HOME THERMOSTATS LIKE THE IPOD DID PORTABLE MUSIC PLAYERS?

The Nest Learning Thermostat is gorgeous, intuitive, and more necessary than you think. Just like a certain blockbuster MP3 player was once upon a time.

Tony Fadell invented the iPod. Okay, he didn't do it singlehandedly--but the former Apple executive conceived it, got Apple on board, and then went on to shepherd the development of 18 (!) generations of the company's signature pre-iPhone product. In 2008 he left Apple and several years later founded a stealth startup called Nest Labs, which was revealed this year to be in the... thermostat business. Wait, what?

Tony Fadell (far left) at Apple together with (from left to right) Jon Rubistein Jonathan Ive, Steve Jobs and Phil Schiller posing for forTime Magazine

Tony Fadell as he appears today

Yeah, you read that right. But not just a thermostat--the iPod of thermostats: a device so desirable and intuitive that it'll turn home energy management into a must-have symbol of sustainable living. Fadell told Co.Design he intends the Nest Learning Thermostat, which will retail for $249.99 starting in November, to be "a jewel on the wall... most people try to hide the thermostat, but we're trying to make it sexy and coveted so that you cherish it, and at parties people ask you about it and you're proud of it." Big talk--but watch this teaser video and you just might become a believer:

 

The Nest thermostat actually is iPod-like:  The display and primary interaction are instantly intuitive and physically irresistible.

To adjust the temperature, turn a ring on the rim of the device--if you're making it cooler, the display turns blue, and if you're making it warmer, it turns red. The temperature itself is displayed in a clear, bright numeric readout--no more squinting at tick marks on a dusty dial. There's also a little green leaf that appears on the screen to guide to you into tweaking your settings for optimal energy savings. And Fadell, no stranger to the importance of a good "unboxing" experience, even went so far as to include a high-quality, custom branded screwdriver with every unit. Fadell says.  

"When you take it out of the box you want it to be easy to install. Apple taught me not to cut corners, and that you don't give up on user experience--ever."

As Fadell notes, the thermostat business was ripe for disruption, and a tantalizing business opportunity as well. He stumbled upon it when he was building his own dream home, an experiment in cutting edge green design in Lake Tahoe. As he considered spending tens of thousands of dollars on a heating and cooling system, it just seemed wrong to link all that tech up to a $90 thermostat from Home Depot that barely worked as advertised, simply because it's design was so poor. So he simply waited for a better product to come along, but it didn't. Upon investigating the market further, he discovered that 10 million thermostats are sold every year. Meanwhile, only 6% of programmable thermostats are actually programmed, even though a programmed thermostat can save 30-40% in heating and cooling costs. That's was clearly a serious design problem.

Click Image To Enlarge

So for users, the best thing about the Nest Learning Thermostat is under that gleaming case. It's equipped with software that analyzes and tracks your usage patterns over time, so that you only have to twist that dial a dozen times before the thermostat can simply anticipate your climate-control needs and take care of it automatically.  Fadell says.

"Instead of programming their thermostats, most people have given up and treat it like a light switch.  But, you have to make those manual adjustments about 1,500 times a year if you want to see any real energy savings."

Nest's version elegantly lets you set it and forget it--at least after that initial learning period. But this thermostat is so sexy, you probably won't mind. 

COMMENTARY:     I love the sleek, elegant, minimalist and simple design of the Nest Learning thermostat.  It definitely shows its Apple roots.   Who would've thought that the home thermostat was due for disruption.  Looks like Tony has definitely solved the home thermostat problem with a thermost that blends into the home and literally "learns" how to save energy as you set temperature settings.    The installation is overcome, too.  Nest sells the Learning thermostat with installation, and will even connect you with an installer located in your zip code.  

A Recap of the Nest Learning Thermostat:

 

Venture capital has rained down on Nest Labs.  In May 2010, the Nest Labs team raised somewhere in the vicinity of $50 million to $80 million from Kleiner Perkins, Google Ventures, Shasta Ventures, Al Gore's Generation Investment Management, Lightspeed Venture Partners, and Intertrust to build a better thermostat. VCs close to the deal put it at a ridiculously high valuation. As Vinod Coleslaw says, "$1 billion valuations are the new black."

In October 2011, Nest Labs finally came out of stealth mode to unveil its new product, the Nest Learning Thermostat.  Who would've guessed that in a world of social networks, mobile devices, and apps, that the next new cool device would be a damn wall thermostat.   Okay, it's not pretty, but it's cool.  No, it's Hot.  I mean its a hot idea, whose time has come.  We shall see if Tony Fadell and his team of engineers and designers got the wall thermostat right.

Courtesy of an article dated October 25, 2011 appearing in Fast Company Design

FACEBOOK SHARE PRICES DROP IN THE SECONDARY MARKETS, SECONDMARKET & SHARESPOST REPORT DROPS IN FB PRICES IN OCT

"Mr. Zuckerberg, sir. Sorry to bother you, but nobody wants to buy Facebook stock anymore."

All this year TechCrunch and others were covering the weekly SecondMarket auctions for Facebook stock. 2.7 million shares, for example, cleared in aggregate the first five auction at prices ranging from $21.01 to $28.26 per share.

The auctions have continued, but there haven’t been the dramatic price increases or decreases needed to trigger the rabid coverage. But today, for the first time I believe, SecondMarket was unable to clear any shares at all in the auction.

The weighted average offer price for this week’s auction was $33.91, roughly in line with the clearing price for last week’s auction. But the weighted average bid price was just $28.15. Zero shares cleared the market, meaning no shares changed hands.

Why? The WSJ article this week pouring cold water on rising startup valuations, and suggesting that venture cash was drying up, was almost certainly the cause. Whether or not there was much truth to the article, things like that can and do freak buyers out and cause them to step back. No one wants to buy at the top of the market.

What really matters is whether or not things pick back up next week or the week after. And whether or not sellers will take lower prices in the $20s to cash out of Facebook.

COMMENTARY:   In a blog post dated October 6, 2011, I reported that SharesPost, another major secondary market broker specializing in sales of private company stocks, held an auction in early October and Facebook shares sold at a historic low of $32.10, valuing Facebook at only $77 billion.  

In a blog post October 8, 2011, eMarketer forecasted a general slowdown in social media advertising revenues for 2011/2012, caused by a slowdown in the economy and overall reduction ad spending by brands.   EMarketer, which tracks internet ad spending, also reduced its forecast of Facebook's ad revenue by 6.1% from the start of the year to $3.8 billion, down from $4 billion.

The above factors have no doubt contributed to the drop in Facebook's share price in the secondary market, and is not a good sign for many Facebook staffers who have planned to cashout their shares.  

The drop in Facebook's share price in the secondary market points to a huge flaw in the auction pricing model used by secondary market brokers.   Secondary market brokers have auctioned very small blocks of Facebook shares (generally about 25,000 shares) to create artificial scarcity and drive up the asking price of Facebook shares for months.  This strategy worked well until now. Investors are apparently not willing to pay the asking price, and the secondary market brokers have pulled the shares off the market rather than to see the price deterioate by accepting lower prices.  

I subscribe to both SharesPost and SecondMarket updates, and have placed a stock watch on both Facebook, Twitter, Zynga and foursquare to see what is going on with their share prices. Will let you know if anythuing major breaks.

Courtesy of an article dated October 14, 2011 appearing in Michael Arrington's UNCRUNCHED 

SEVEN WAYS AN INTEGRATED APPLE TELEVISION SET WOULD CHANGE EVERYTHING

 

A revolutionary new TV could be coming to an Apple Store near you. Here are the seven ways that it could change everything.

Apple’s (NASDAQ: AAPL) first venture into television manufacturing has been rumored for months. But it wasn’t until now that we finally received confirmation of the TV’s existence.

For the past week or two, Walter Isaacson has been releasing excerpts from his upcoming book, the first and only official biography on Steve Jobs. On Sunday, Isaacson released his most intriguing excerpt yet, revealing that Jobs once claimed that he had designed a simpler TV interface. Jobs told Isaacson during one of his interviews for the biography.

“I finally cracked it.” 

It’s very interesting that Jobs would reveal this, and even more interesting that this information would come to light now, several months before Apple is slated (rumored?) to make any official announcements.

What will an Apple television set mean for the future of TV? After forming my own predictions, I spoke with Trip Chowdhry, the Managing Director of Equity Research at Global Equities Research, for his take on Apple’s next major release.

1. Simplicity Will Reign Supreme

During our discussion, Chowdhry reiterated his belief that Apple was dedicated to making a television set that would eliminate all of the cumbersome aspects of the current crop of TVs. More specifically, Chowdhry believes that the Apple TV sets will require only one wire. He also thinks that the setup process will be a bit of a cakewalk – perhaps even simpler than a Mac computer.

2. Bigger Computing Will Take Over

While it may not be a feature of the initial batch of Apple television sets, there is no doubt in my mind that these TVs will eventually become oversized monitors for Macs. The benefits of Mac compatibility (via Airport, Thunderbolt or some other technology) would be nearly endless.

(Check out more Benzinga Apple analysis here.)

3. No More Eye Strain

One of the key features of Apple’s first TV could be something you wouldn’t expect: the viewing angle. Chowdhry says that Apple is designing the first set that will allow consumers to sit anywhere in the room and have the same experience enjoyed by the person sitting directly in front of the TV.

4. Remotes will be Obliterated

Electronics manufacturers are so determined to get us to buy new remotes (along with universal remotes and other TV- and DVD-controlling remotes) that they have not bothered to toy with the concept of simplifying the whole process.

Apple, on the other hand, is all about simplification.

“Using the iPad as a remote would not be natural.”

To all users, Chowdhry said, refuting the belief that Apple will simply require users to change channels with an existing iDevice. Apple, he added, was not thinking of technologists when developing its TV.

Rather, Chowdhry is convinced that Apple’s remote could be a carbon copy of the one Bose developed for its HDTV.

What about Siri? Couldn’t this technology eliminate the need for a remote and make the process of changing channels much simpler?

“Microsoft would think that way, but Apple is not that big of an idiot.”

Chowdhry said with a laugh. He explained that voice recognition only works in a quiet environment, thus making it next to impossible to use with a TV.

5. The 3D Revolution is Coming

…But not at launch. While Apple has been associated with 3D screen development ever since it filed a patent for a glasses-free 3D projector last year, Chowdhry does not think its technology – or any other 3D feature – will make it into the TVs at launch. However, Chowdhry does believe that 3D is “in the roadmap” for future Apple TV iterations.

(Benzinga’s Options & Volatility Edge gave a 250% gain on Genworth – check the service out here.)

6. Apple Stores Will Continue to Get Bigger

Have you been to an Apple Store lately? If so, then chances are you have noticed that your local store has been or will be remodeled in the near future. The reason, Chowdhry says, is because the current Apple Stores are not large enough to house all of the Mac and iDevice equipment and a 60-inch television set. Chowdhry is convinced that Apple has started to expand and remodel its stores in preparation for a March unveiling of its first TV.

7. Consumers Will Learn to Expect (And Accept) Higher Prices

There has been a lot of speculation regarding how much Apple would (or could) charge for a new TV. I personally have argued that there’s no way the company would charge $1,200 (as estimated by Gene Munster) for a new TV when it charges $1,000 for a 27-inch monitor. I firmly believe that, assuming the smallest model is any larger than 27 inches, Apple will charge significantly more.

Chowdhry, however, believes that Apple will offer three different television sets, starting at around $1,200 (for the entry-level model) and going all the way up to $4,000. While he is unsure of the size options that Apple will offer, Chowdhry says that the cheapest set will not offer any built-in surround sound features. The high-end, $4,000 model, however, should come equipped with 16 to 24 built-in speakers for an unprecedented surround sound experience, similar to the Bose VideoWave Entertainment System, which retails for $5,349.

Regardless, one has to consider the sales potential of a TV that retails for 1/4 the price of a new car. Who, besides the wealthiest and most loyal Apple fans, would pay $4,000 for a new TV?

Chowdhry is convinced that the price won’t matter as much as we would expect. He told Benzinga that people will be persuaded as soon as they “see and experience” Apple’s television sets.

Further, Chowdhry points out that if you break down the costs of a high-end 60-inch TV (somewhere in the range of $2,000), plus the cost of a high-end surround sound system ($1,200), plus other extras, you are dangerously close to the predicted cost of a 60-inch Apple TV.

COMMENTARY:   The idea of an Apple television set has been around for quite sometime.  It's the logical next move.   If Steve Jobs told his biographier that he had "cracked it", I doubt he would've given him any specific details or forbid him telling others.  It's the old "Culture of Fear" instigated by jobs to keep secrecy on a strictly need-to-know basis. 

Rumors of an Apple TV set have been circulating for at least two years. In a May 2010 blog post, Peter Yared wrote:

“Stylish, high-end TVs is the last consumer electronics frontier for Apple to dominate, and it will make apps as much of a differentiator on TVs as they were on smartphones.”

 and:

“The TV is the last frontier in Silicon Valley’s relentless drive to computerize every screen. With the price of fully Internet-enabling a screen at below $300, everything that people see and touch is being turned into a computer: mobile phones, billboards, price displays, and with the iPad even magazines, books, and newspapers.”

More recently, Gene Munster, an oft-quoted analyst at the PiperJaffray investment bank, repeated his prediction of an Apple TV set launch in 2012, with Stewart Alsop adding:

“Apple will do to television manufacturers what it did to phone makers with the iPhone…”

The idea is exciting and so obvious it’s got to happen. Imagine a true plug-and-play experience. One set with only two wires: power and the cable TV coax. Turn it on, assert your Apple ID credentials and you’re in business. The program guide looks good and is easy to navigate; pay channels are just a click and a password away. The TV runs apps, from games to FaceTime and Skype, it “just works’’ with your other iDevices and also acts as a Wi-Fi base station using the cable provider’s Internet service.

One things is for sure:  the Apple television set would have to fit within the "Digital Hub Strategy" upon which Jobs built the new Apple after his return to the company in 1997.   

Given Steve Jobs, and therefore Apple's, propensity to create closed systems or products that incorporate the Apple OS and hardware, it would have to be Apple's own proprietary television set.

The damn thing would have to be an appliance like your typical television, where the entire family could view it, but ot would be Apple in every way possible.  I agree with Chowdhry on points #1 and #2.

When it comes to point #3 (eliminating eye strain), I don't know how you could design a television set where the view would be the same no matter from which angle you watched it from.  I just don't think it's technically possible.  If you "think differently," as Jobs would, the new television set would require individual viewing headsets that would give you the "big picture", "resolution", "colors" and the full 3-D effect.   Each viewing headset would allow you to watch television anywhere in the house or office for that matter.

I disagree with Chowdhry that Apple would not use its existing mobile devices (iPhone or iPad) as television remotes or point #4.  Why not.  It makes perfect sense.  You could easily add infrared signal capability to the iPhone or iPad and a new app would convert it into a TV remote, providing the viewer with the means to change channels, adjust the sound, and operate external electronics appliances like DVD players or tuner/amplifiers. 

I disagree with Chowdhry on point #5   You could bet that Steve Jobs would want the full 3-D effect.  It would be a sin to leave out 3D from a future Apple television set.  That's where my idea of 3D viewing headsets come in (see point #3 above).

With regard to point #6.  You don't have to necessarily increase or radically redesign Apple Stores to accomodate an Apple television set.  You would only need room for five Apple television sets, one each for 27, 32, 37, 42 and 60-inch screens.  You could easily mount them on the walls throughout the store or on one of the tables back-to-pack.  Easy-peezy.

I disagree with Chowdhry on point #7.  Apple customers are already used to paying premium prices for everything.  They will pay premium prices for the Apple television set too.   

Enough said.

Courtesy of an article dated October 24, 2011 appearing in Forbes and an article dated September 4, 2011 appearing in MondayNotes

 

INFOGRAPHIC: THE ECONOMICS OF MAKING YOUR HOME MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT AND ECO-FRIENDLY

Energy-efficient home improvements cost a lot up front, but eventually pay themselves off. Exactly how long does it take? Consult this handy chart.

The idea of the home of the future--equipped with all sorts of fancy, clean energy features--is an appealing vision. Sadly, many of us have houses that are already stuck squarely in the present. To do something like add solar panels, or even just insulate better, requires what can be an extreme cash outlay. But there's an upside: If you're improving your house to be more energy efficient, you're going to start saving money. Are you going to save enough to make your expenditures worthwhile?

That's the question that the latest infographic from solar provider One Block Off The Grid attempts to answer. Should you throw down for that retrofit? The truth is, it depends on what you want to do, and--more importantly--how long you're going to stay in your house.

If you're just passing through, consider efficient shower heads (paid off in less than a year with it's $300 of savings) or a programmable thermostat (just a hair over six months). For the more sedentary among us, there are projects that will take longer, like solar panels (11 years to recoup investment) or radiant floors that distribute heat and reduce costs (7 years).

But what's good to remember is that once you make it past the break-even point, you're saving money every year, money that goes right into your wallet. In the case of solar power, you might even start making money, as you can feed energy back into the grid. Over 20 years, you're going to save $60,000 in electricity costs with solar panels; $11,000 with radiant floors. Think long-term, and these improvements start seeming better and better.

Because it's easier to read in pictures, here's the full infographic:

Click Image To Enlarge

Courtesy of an article dated October 24, 2011 appearing in Fast Company

 

 

THE KEY TO ERICSSON'S SUCCESS: NOT TAKING ON THE IPHONE, FOCUSING ON CHINA AND MOBILE INFRASTRUCTURE

The world is swiftly adapting to mobile internet solutions, and in industrialized nations the era of dumbphones and 2G tech is all but over. This represents a huge opportunity for Swedish firm Ericsson, because though you may not know it, Ericsson's technology underpins much of the hardware that makes cell phone networks actually work.

After a very strong showing for the quarter, the company expects to sell some $41.3 billion in wireless infrastructure gear around the world this year, and Gartner expects this figure to hit $48 billion by 2015. Ericsson is big, much bigger than its partnership with Sony would suggest. Both before and since the company's decision about 10 years ago to partner with Sony to make cell phones--a move that saw both firms shutting their own production efforts in favor of joint designs--the company has concentrated less on the consumer space and more on making money from the behind-the-scenes tech that makes the phones connect to the voice network, and mobile Net. They have innovated and earned money where others have left a gap in the market--around the whole world, not just industrialized nations.

Ericsson CEO Hans Vestberg

CEO Hans Vestberg spoke to Fast Company about Ericsson's future in the global communications game this week.

With China currently being feted as Apple's biggest opportunity for growth, Vestberg noted that Ericsson had in one form or another been operating in China for over a Century:

"We came to China in 1892, we've been there a long, long time and we're definitely the biggest international vendor in China--we have a high market share."

In particular being the "biggest" 3G tech supplier to China Mobile, and the "second biggest" for China Unicom, Ericsson serves both the world's largest cell phone provider, and the world's third biggest. With China's middle classes embracing mobile technology (and loving the iPhone, it seems) Vestberg sees the head-to-head competition with Apple on the phone front as immaterial, and beneficial.

He said.  

"With more smartphones on the market, there are more users of the network."

Even if the iPhone becomes as popular in China as it is in the West, that could represent increased demand for Ericsson's infrastructure and services. On the other hand, Vestberg sees Apple as competition for Sony-Ericsson, but is confident their offerings are in squarely different market segments with the iPhone at the high-end, and SE on the "high-end of the mid smartphone range." He suggests,

"We can probably live with each other."

While Ericsson's role in the developed world revolves around infrastructure overhaul, in the U.S., and in Europe (where the company's mainly involved in network upgrades and coverage boosting today) a case-study for its future growth exists in standardizing billing systems, which have not been standardized in the telecom space, yet Vestber says.

A move toward smartphone wave-and-pay systems, billed via carrier fees rather than credit card-based systems, plays into Ericsson's plans:

"We roughly have 50% of all pre-pay customers in the world [using] the Ericsson platform, and of course many of those people don't have a bank account."

Vestberg pointed out. As cell phone payment systems expand in wealthy nations, parallel systems like wave-and-pay will also also gain traction in places like Africa. Vestberg notes:

"There's a big social impact, because non-bank account holders will, in effect, have a bank account."

Albeit a portable electronic one via their phones.

The company's map for the future is centered on the intersection between increasing use of smartphones, and the emergent internet of things. Vestberg proudly pointed out that his company is doing "a truckload of research" about how these technologies "impact society, in terms of everything from sustainable GDP growth to how much it creates net jobs." The CEO thinks,  

"The next twenty years is going to be what we call the network society, where anything that benefits from being connected [to the Net] will be connected, and that'll be transformative for many, many industries."

It's also tempting to see huge promise in Ericsson's use of its patent portfolio, and an example for other telecoms and tech firms currently bickering about IP infringements in the courts. Ericsson, has one of the larger patent portfolios in the industry, but  Vestberg reports,

"We basically cross-license it with all players in the industry. If you want to be a part of this industry you have a cross-license with Ericsson. If not, it's quite hard to make a phone or make infrastructure for mobility."

Quiet advances behind the scenes, reliable technology, a global services business, and a strong handle on the next revolution in mobile tech--that seems to be an inventive position in the cluttered mobile market. But Vestberg was also careful to note.

"For 135 years we've been around and a leader in this industry. There have been many changes, both in the competitive landscape and changes in the technology. But we cannot rely on the history to continue to be number one in the industry."

Innovation, whether consumer-facing or not, is Ericsson's watchword.

COMMETNARY:   I always thought of Ericsson in terms of Sony Ericsson mobile phones, but it's a lot more than this and highly diversified providing telecom's with the backbone infrastructure to support both fixed and mobile networks.  Ericsson AB is divided into three principal business units and two joint-ventures:

Click Image To Enlarge

Ericsson's business units and joint-ventures are described below:

Network Infrastructure -  Network infrastructure provides the fundamentals for people to communicate.  Increasing mobile data traffic and use of the internet creates demand for highperforming and cost-efficient networks that deliver the best user experience.  Ericsson was a driver in the development of 2G and 3G technology.   Ericsson is now taking one step further with LTE (4G) and the evolution towards all-IP.   The company's technology expertise, broad product portfolio and the world’s largest installed base  enable them to meet the network evolution needs of mobile and fixed operators.

Multimedia - Multimedia solutions make it simple for people to activate and use a variety of services, with easy and instant control of spending.   Ericsson delivers communication solutions such as networking and collaboration services, with quick access to content and applications as well as with charging and billing functions.  They provide solutions for TV services to devices such as TV sets, mobile phones and PCs.  TV services are real-time or on-demand and can include interactive services.

Global Services - Effectively managing large and complex projects and multi-vendor networks requires experience and understanding.  Ericsson combines robust local capabilities with global expertise in network rollout, systems integration, consulting, network operation and customer support.  This enables the company to understand and respond to each customer’s unique challenges. When operators outsource service activities to Ericsson, they can focus even more on their core business of attracting, serving and retaining customers. 

Sony Ericsson - Sony Ericsson is a joint venture, combining Ericsson’s technology leadership with Sony’s consumer electronics expertise. Sony Ericsson offers exciting consumer experience through mobile phones, accessories, content and applications.  For Ericsson, it provides a valuable link to the consumer.

ST-Ericsson - More than half of all mobile phones in use today are enabled by ST-Ericsson. Its wireless platforms and semiconductors allow smarter communication, mobile entertainment and mobile broadband connectivity.  For Ericsson, the joint venture is the link between infrastructure and handsets

Click Image To Enlarge

Click Image To Enlarge

Ericsson AB reported excellent financial results for the year ending December 31, 2010 and is having a very strong 2011 through the Q3 ending September 30, 2011.

Click Image To Enlarge

Click Image To Enlarge

Ericsson AB's Consolidated Balance Sheets for the years ending December 31, 2010 and 2009 reflects above average financial condition, with sufficient cash to pay current liabilities.  However, it is carrying substantial long-term debt, which is not too unusual for a company requiring extensive capital investments in fixed and mobile network infrastructure.  

Click Image To Enlarge

Courtesy of an article dated October 21, 2011 appearing Fast Company

GARTNER: COMPANIES WILL GENERATE 50% OF WEB SALES VIA SOCIAL NETWORKS AND MOBILE APPS BY 2015

By 2015, companies will generate 50 percent of Web sales via their social presence and mobile applications, according to Gartner, Inc.

Vendors in the e-commerce market will begin to offer new context-aware, mobile-based application capabilities that can be accessed via a browser or installed as an application on a phone.

Gartner analysts discussed the future of e-commerce at Gartner Symposium/ITxpo, taking place here through today. As the number of mobile phones overtakes PCs, customers will use mobile browsers and applications as the main points of interaction.

 

Gene Alvarez, research vice president at Gartner says.

"E-commerce organizations will need to scale up their operations to handle the increased visitation loads resulting from customers not having to wait until they are in front of a PC to obtain answers to questions or place orders.  In time, e-commerce vendors will begin to offer context-aware mobile-shopping solutions as part of their overall Web sales offerings."

Mr. Alvarez said.

"Customers are clamoring for new and easy ways to interact with the organizations they deal with, and no company should think itself immune to this new business dynamic.  As more people use smartphones, they will expect an extension of their customer experience to be supported by this kind of device while demanding that social aspects of the Web be intertwined with this experience. At the same time, organizations are looking toward new countries and regions for growth. As a result, it is time to take a fresh look at your organization's Web sales capabilities to ensure that social software, mobile technology and globalization are part of your organization's online future."

Industries such as entertainment, software development/publishing and media are being driven by fast-moving changes in their businesses, such as mobility, and the increasing number of mobile devices available to their buyers. Others are finding that sales of additional services and products can be added to their customer-service-focused websites. Due to consumerization, sites in all industries are being impacted by customer experience delivered in the retail space, as customers continue to use their online experiences as the benchmark by which to evaluate all others.

Gartner predicts that by 2013, 80 percent of North American and European online sellers will expand into Brazil, Russia, India, Africa, Japan or China. Organizations based in North America and Western Europe are already launching website-based sales operations in new countries, in the hope of expanding to new markets. These organizations believe that untapped countries can spur growth by enabling the enticing of potential customers who have never purchased from the organization, but who have a desire for its products.

Mr. Alvarez said. 

"The increasing availability of access to the Internet via PCs, laptops and mobile devices is creating new sales channels in countries, because entry barriers are lowering, thereby increasing the number of online shoppers.  By entering these countries via an Internet sales model, organizations can establish a presence in locations without having to create a physical sales location."

E-commerce managers in Type A (leading) organizations and industries, such as travel, hospitality, retail, consumer electronics, media and entertainment, will begin to take advantage of GPS location services enabled by phones to push personalized, location-based content to mobile devices for users who have subscribed to these services. This content will be created via the use of customer patterns and their link to driving sales. These organizations will also have connected (via Web browsers and mobile applications) to many social communities, enabling the organizations to tap into the social networks of customers and leverage the wisdom of the crowd.

COMMENTARY:   At the Gartner Symposium/ITexpo held in Orlando in 2010, Gartner's David Cearley, discussed the top 10 strategic technologies for 2011.    

 

Three big technologies have already started to make their impact in 2011:

Cloud computing - Vendors will go from experimentation to implementation.  HP and IBM and Microsoft will come into the market with an expanded set of offerings.  Apple just launched iCloud. Cloud service brokers will come into play.  Public and private cloud computing, too.  

Context-aware computing - All about my personal preferences: my social network, my favorities, my content, my connections. Context aware systems deliver things in a more customized fashion.  Ensemble programming.  The environment becomes the computer.  I think that you can add augmented reality into the mix.  

Mobile and tablet computing  - The Era of the PC is over, not literally, but no longer dominates as the key device.  The PC is not really replaced.  Tablets like the iPad serve as an ignition point. Smartphones and tablets becomes as important as the PC.   A lot of commerce will be initiated through mobile devices.  

Mobile devices of all types:  smartphones, tablets, game consoles, internet TV controllers and the like, will all become the key entry points for ecommerce.  This is already happening.   Payment by smartphone apps are already here.  Barcode reading an item at a store, then doing online comparative pricing to find the best online deal, and initiating an order at the same time.  We see this happening already.

Whether social networks like Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and LinkedIn will become the new ecommerce hubs of tomorrow remains to be seen.   I have gone on the record, as have several ecommerce experts, that social networks have yet to prove their metal when it comes to ecommerce.  We are still not seeing wholesale ecommerce vendors abandoning their regular ecommerce sites and embedding them within Facebook.  A few have done this, but they are very few. The dollars to make s-commerce or f-commerce a reality are still not there (less than 4% of total ecommerce revenues within five years) and consumers must feel comfortable purchasing things online through their social networks.  Privacy concerns have a lot to do with this.  I will believe it when I see it.    

Courtesy of an article dated October 19, 2011 appearing in Gartner