ImaginativePRO Blog

KITE: THE AMAZING SQUARE MOSQUITO REPELLANT STICKER, COULD END THE SPREAD OF MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASES IN AFRICA

The Kite Patch acts like an impenetrable force field to keep mosquitos from biting people. (Click Image To Enlarge)

The Kite Patch is a little square sticker that emits a cloak of chemical compounds that block a mosquito's ability to sense humans. Image: ieCrowd

Mosquitos were born to bite us, and aside from lighting worthless tiki candles, haplessly swatting them away, or resorting to spraying toxic DEET all over ourselves, there’s really not a whole lot we can do about it. Imagine then, if you could be encapsulated in an anti-mosquito bubble simply by wearing a small square sticker. Not only would it save mosquito-magnets like myself some really uncomfortable moments, it could be a major game changer in the way we prevent mosquito-borne illnesses like Malaria, Dengue Fever, and West Nile Virus.

The Like Patch has one purpose: Make humans "invisible" to mosquitos (Click Image To Enlarge)

The good news is that a sticker like this is not some far away concept dreamed up by scientists in a lab–it’s actually a real thing that you’ll likely be able to find on the shelves of your local Walgreens sometime in the not-so-distant future.

The Kite Patch could be the solution to ending the spread of mosquito transmitted diseases like Malaria, Dengue Fever, West Nile Fever (Click Image To Enlarge)

Essentially, the Kite Patch is a little square sticker that emits a cloak of chemical compounds that blocks a mosquito’s ability to sense humans. According to its developers, users simply have to place the patch onto their clothes, and they become invisible to mosquitoes for up to 48 hours. This is big news for developing countries like Uganda, where residents have little beyond mosquito nets and toxic sprays to combat the illness-spreading insects.

Olfactor Laboratories developed non-toxic compounds that work against mosquitoes' long-range abilities to detect humans through CO2, as well as dampening the bug’s short-range ability to sense us from our basic human odors. Image courtesy of Olfactor Laboratories (Click Image To Enlarge)

That’s exactly where Kite’s creators, a collaborative team made up of innovation venture capital group ieCrowd and Olfactor Laboratories, intend to ship these off to as soon as they’re done blowing past their second goal on global crowdsourcing site Indiegogo. Launched just last month, the campaign surpassed its original goal of $75,000 in just four days and is now gunning for a new goal of $385,000 (currently at $336,000).

 

Though the Kite seems a little fantastical, it’s backed by some legitimate technology. Back in 2011, Dr. Anandasankar Ray, an entomologist at the University of California, Riverside (and founder of Olfactor Labs), found that certain chemical compounds can inhibit the carbon dioxide receptors in mosquitoes. These smelly compounds, which act like a anti-mosquito force field, are able to disorient the bugs, whose main method of tracking down humans is through our exhalation of CO2.

A scientist testing the chemical compounds in the Kite Patch. Image courtesy of Olfactor Laboratories. (Click Image To Enlarge)

The findings were considered a breakthrough moment in the field, but the technology was far from ready to be applied to a consumer product mostly because the compounds were toxic and wouldn’t be able to pass through FDA and EPA approval.  Grey Frandsen, Vice President at ieCrowd explains.  

“It wasn’t ready to be placed into a product that could mean something globally.” 

The hand on the left shows how mosquitos react to the Kite Patch not containing the mosquito repellant compounds, and the hand on the right shows that mosquitos are repelled as a result of the repellant compounds in the Kite Patch. (Click Image To Enlarges)

That’s where his company came in.

ieCrowd basically functions as the belt of an innovation assembly line, guiding an idea through the necessary steps so it can become a widely distributed, (hopefully) world-changing product.  It begins with acquiring the intellectual property, like they did with Dr. Ray’s research. From there they provide all of the business infrastructure, marketing, and general support so subsidiary companies can focus exclusively on developing new technology.   In the case of the Kite Patch, ieCrowd worked with a group of scientists at Olfactor Laboratories, a research facility in Riverside, Calif. that developed a new targeted library of chemical compounds based on Dr. Ray’s original research.

Olfactor’s non-toxic compounds work against mosquitoes’ long-range abilities to detect humans through CO2, as well as dampening the insect’s short-range ability to sense us from our basic human odors.  These chemicals, which give off a “faint pleasant smell,” will be applied to a small sticker, which Frandsen notes is the cheapest, easiest, and most adaptable way to design a spatial insect repellant. The patches will then be shipped off to Uganda for field testing, which should begin before the end of the year. Frandsen says of ieCrowd’s method.

“Really, what we’re doing is creating a rapid scientific development process, a rapid prototyping process and then a very aggressive go to market strategy.” 

The Kite Patch needed to be affordable, adaptable and easy to use, which is why it was designed as a square sticker. Image by ieCrowd.  (Click Image To Enlarge)

The product has had a little help along the way, namely from the National Institutes of Health, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. Frandsen says.

“The big names behind us have helped us advance the science.  But those grants do not cover product development.”

All of the money raised from the Indiegogo campaign will be funneled into extensive field testing. Originally, the testing was going to provide 20,000 patches (around 1 million hours of coverage) to one district in Uganda. The extra money raised will double the number of Kite Patches shipped and expand the coverage to four million hours in three political districts in the country.

The idea is to refine the Kite as much as possible during the field testing and hone in on three main goals:  

• Analyze the adaptability of the patch.  
  • Is it easy to apply and wear? 
  • Does it work well both at morning and at night? 
  • Does it fall off people’s clothing at after a certain point? 
• Test the effectiveness of the technology in harsh conditions found in places like Sub-Saharan Africa. Scientists have yet to determine exactly how far the sticker’s spatial radius extends and will be looking to see how it reacts to wind and extreme weather. 
• Begin field testing to evaluate how the sticker interacts with and can supplement current malaria prevention technology like bed nets.

Frandsen says.

“We’re looking at: What are any shortfalls specifically relating to the design that we can solve for that don’t come from testing it with 100 people in the Canadian Rockies or in Florida?  So there’s this real life, real world use and evaluation of that.”

The Kite has reportedly performed well inside the highly-controlled confines of a lab, but Frandsen says the most vital evaluation will come from the Kite Patch’s time in Africa.  He says of the extensive field testing. 

“It’s a really unique way of doing product development.  It’s a lot easier to deal in private-equity markets or investments and just finish it.”

But, he continues,

“This technology is too important to just funnel directly to the Walgreens. It needs to be part and parcel of people’s daily lives all over the world.”

You can donate to the Kite Patch campaign on Indiegogo.

COMMENTARY:    The Kite Patch is a no-brainer that is destined to become a game changer.   The Kite Patch is a product that screams for capital to speedup the research needed to test the patch's adaptability, efficacy and begin field testing.  I say the faster the better.  The Kite Patch is needed right now, especially in tropical countries of the world where mosquito-borne diseases like Malaria, kill millions of people each year.  

Courtesy of an article dated August 16, 2013 appearing in Wired 

 

HOW WORLD VIEW PLANS ON TAKING PASSENGERS TO AN ALTITUDE OF 100,000 FEET ON BOARD A GONDOLA FOR A COOL $75,000

World View Gondola as it would appear when it reaches an altitude of 100,000 feet. (Click Image To Enlarge)

It’s not space. It’s more like a high-altitude vacation. A new Arizona company is joining the outer edges of the tourism industry to find passengers who want to see a dark sky and the curvature of the Earth, all without boarding a sub-orbital rocket and paying the insane entry price.

World View CEO Jane Poynter said in a statement today. 

“Seeing the Earth hanging in the ink-black void of space will help people realize our connection to our home planet and to the universe around us.  It is also our goal to open up a whole new realm for exercising human curiosity, scientific research and education.”

Like the Spain-based zero2infinity, World View is planning rides in a relatively spacious gondola, suspended beneath a balloon, that will carry passengers to around 100,000 feet. The view is a long ways from Virgin Galactic’s plans for sub-orbital rocket rides at 360,000 feet, but the view from a gondola will last for a few hours (or more). It’s also a lot cheaper at $75,000, compared to the current ticket price of $250,000 for a ride on Virgin’s SpaceShipTwo which will only spend a few minutes at the peak of its flight before descending back to earth.

Virgin Galactic will ferry passengers into the fringes of outerspace for up to $250,000 per seat. (Click Image To Enlarge) 

The ability to spend hours at 100,000 feet, does offer new opportunities, even if it doesn’t include the weightlessness being touted by Virgin Galactic’s parabolic flight path. The helium balloon could be launched at night to offer a spectacular sunrise opportunity with pretty much all of the atmosphere below you, and the darkness of space remaining above you even after the sun is up.

Just as Virgin Galactic isn’t the only company planning rocket propelled sub-orbital tourism rides — XCOR’s Lynx is a single passenger rocket plane — World View isn’t the alone in looking to offer a peaceful high altitude balloon ride. Zero2infinity’s is planning a similar experience to around 120,000 feet. Both companies are eager to point out the passenger view from the quiet balloon will be close to the same view offered by the rocket powered vehicles flying much higher. World View shared a copy of a letter from the Federal Aviation Administration saying that the company’s six passenger, two pilot gondola will qualify as a space vehicle because the conditions at 100,000 feet requires the same kind of protection as those that actually enter space, “because a person would rapidly experience fatal decompression.”

World View Gondola as it would appear suspended under a huge helium baloon when it reaches an altitude of 100,000 feet. (Click Image To Enlarge)

There is no actual line where the atmosphere ends and where space begins, so it’s common for many endeavors to include “space” as part of the title. Red Bull referred to Felix Baumgartner’s  record setting jump as a mission to the edge of space. In fact, it used the same basic idea that World View and zero2infinity are offering with a pressurized gondola, and a lightweight balloon. Though the latter two companies have no plans on making the passengers exit at altitude for a supersonic return to earth.

The highest flying airplanes can fly at up to about 70,000 feet. Some jets have made “zoom” flight past 100,000 feet. But with only a few percent of the atmosphere at that altitude, the normal flight controls aren’t useful and they must use small rocket thrusters to maneuver.

Most definitions of space are less about a true scientific number, rather they opt for nice round numbers well above the atmosphere. Virgin Galactic and the Lynx both plan on climbing above the Karman line, an arbitrary and metric based definition of space at 100 kilometers altitude (62 miles or 328,000 feet). At that altitude you are definitely above anything that resembles the atmosphere. Pilots in the X-15 winged rocket plane were given astronaut wings for flights above 50 miles.

World View says it expects to launch its balloon and gondola from several locations around the United States. Eventually it could expand operations worldwide. Like zero2infinity’s bloon, World View’s gondola will be flown back to earth beneath a paraglider-type wing that will provided added range and maneuverability.

World View has not yet begun flight testing of its system, but is hoping for passenger flights as early as 2016. Zero2infinity recently tested a scale version of its system, including lifting the inflatable “pod” it is planning for passengers to more than 88,000 feet.

COMMENTARY:   It's absolutely incredible how many experimental startup companies are stepping to the plate to ferry affluent passengers into the fringes of outerspace for between $75,000 and $250,000.  Pick your poison.  NASA, FAA and TSA need to keep a watchful eye on these startups to insure that they are doing everything absolutely possible to protect the safety of these passengers.  Going into outerspace or extreme heights like World View, is no joke.  It's dangerous, and exploiting a few priveleged, jaded and affluent passengers for the all mighty dollar, could end on one huge calamity. 

Courtesy of an article dated October 22, 2013 appearing in Wired

IT'S A DANGEROUS PLACE OUT THERE, 10,000TH NEAR-EARTH OBJECT FOUND IN SPACE, BUT NUMBER COULD BE 10 TIMES HIGHER

Asteroid 2013 MZ5 as seen by the University of Hawaii's PanSTARR-1 telescope. In this animated gif, the asteroid moves relative to a fixed background of stars. Asteroid 2013 MZ5 is in the right of the first image, towards the top, moving diagonally left/down. Image credit: PS-1/UH   Larger view | Unannotated version

More than 10,000 asteroids and comets that can pass near Earth have now been discovered.

The 10,000th near-Earth object, asteroid 2013 MZ5, was first detected on the night of June 18, 2013, by the Pan-STARRS-1 telescope, located on the 10,000-foot (3,000-meter) summit of the Haleakala crater on Maui. Managed by the University of Hawaii, the PanSTARRS survey receives NASA funding. 

Ninety-eight percent of all near-Earth objects discovered were first detected by NASA-supported surveys. 

Plot of orbits of known potentially hazardous asteroids (size over 460 feet (140 m) and passing within 4.7 million miles (7.6×10⁶ km) of Earth's orbit) as of early 2013 (Click Image To Enlarge)

Lindley Johnson, program executive for NASA's Near-Earth Object Observations Program at NASA Headquarters, Washington, said.

"Finding 10,000 near-Earth objects is a significant milestone.  But there are at least 10 times that many more to be found before we can be assured we will have found any and all that could impact and do significant harm to the citizens of Earth."

(Click Image To Enlarge)

During Johnson's decade-long tenure, 76 percent of the NEO discoveries have been made. 

Near-Earth objects (NEOs) are asteroids and comets that can approach the Earth's orbital distance to within about 28 million miles (45 million kilometers). They range in size from as small as a few feet to as large as 25 miles (41 kilometers) for the largest near-Earth asteroid, 1036 Ganymed. 

1036 Ganymed, is the code name of an asteroid that has a diameter of 34 kilometers. The giant asteroid ever discovered by Walter Baade on October 23, 1924. (Click Image To Enlarge)

Asteroid 2013 MZ5 is approximately 1,000 feet (300 meters) across. Its orbit is well understood and will not approach close enough to Earth to be considered potentially hazardous. 

Eliptical orbit of near-Earth object codename 2013 MZ5 as of June 28, 2013 (Click Image To Enlarge)

Don Yeomans, long-time manager of NASA's Near-Earth Object Program Office at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, said.   

"The first near-Earth object was discovered in 1898.  Over the next hundred years, only about 500 had been found. But then, with the advent of NASA's NEO Observations program in 1998, we've been racking them up ever since. And with new, more capable systems coming on line, we are learning even more about where the NEOs are currently in our solar system, and where they will be in the future." 

Of the 10,000 discoveries, roughly 10 percent are larger than six-tenths of a mile (one kilometer) in size - roughly the size that could produce global consequences should one impact the Earth. However, the NASA NEOO program has found that none of these larger NEOs currently pose an impact threat and probably only a few dozen more of these large NEOs remain undiscovered. 

The vast majority of NEOs are smaller than one kilometer, with the number of objects of a particular size increasing as their sizes decrease. For example, there are expected to be about 15,000 NEOs that are about one-and-half football fields in size (460 feet, or 140 meters), and more than a million that are about one-third a football field in size (100 feet, or 30 meters). A NEO hitting Earth would need to be about 100 feet (30 meters) or larger to cause significant devastation in populated areas. Almost 30 percent of the 460-foot-sized NEOs have been found, but less than 1 percent of the 100-foot-sized NEOs have been detected. 

Barringer Meteorite Crater (aka Meteor Crater), near Winslow, Arizona, is one of the best known impact craters on planet Earth. (Click Image To Enlarge)

Barringer Meteorite Crater, near Winslow, Arizona, is one of the best known impact craters on planet Earth.  The crater is one mile wide, and up to 570 feet deep. Historically, this crater is the first recognized to be caused by an impact rather than a volcanic eruption.  A scientific investigation indicates that the asteroid responsible for the crater, a 300,000 ton nickel-iron meteor, impacted Earth near Flagstaff, Ariznona some 50,000 years ago.  Estimates suggest that it was about 130 feet across and was traveling over 26,000 miles per hour.  For comparison, the asteroid or comet impactor that created the Chicxulub crater 65 million years ago, and is thought to have caused the extinction of the dinosaurs, was 6 to 12 miles across.

When it originated, the NASA-instituted Near-Earth Object Observations Program provided support to search programs run by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Lincoln Laboratory (LINEAR); the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NEAT); the University of Arizona (Spacewatch, and later Catalina Sky Survey) and the Lowell Observatory (LONEOS). All these search teams report their observations to the Minor Planet Center, the central node where all observations from observatories worldwide are correlated with objects, and they are given unique designations and their orbits are calculated. 

Tim Spahr, director of the Minor Planet Center says.

"When I began surveying for asteroids and comets in 1992, a near-Earth object discovery was a rare event.  These days we average three NEO discoveries a day, and each month the Minor Planet Center receives hundreds of thousands of observations on asteroids, including those in the main-belt. The work done by the NASA surveys, and the other international professional and amateur astronomers, to discover and track NEOs is really remarkable."

Within a dozen years, the program achieved its goal of discovering 90 percent of near-Earth objects larger than 3,300 feet (1 kilometer) in size. In December 2005, NASA was directed by Congress to extend the search to find and catalog 90 percent of the NEOs larger than 500 feet (140 meters) in size. When this goal is achieved, the risk of an unwarned future Earth impact will be reduced to a level of only one percent when compared to pre-survey risk levels. This reduces the risk to human populations, because once an NEO threat is known well in advance, the object could be deflected with current space technologies. 

Currently, the major NEO discovery teams are the Catalina Sky Survey, the University of Hawaii's Pan-STARRS survey and the LINEAR survey. The current discovery rate of NEOs is about 1,000 per year. 

NASA's Near-Earth Object Observations Program manages and funds the search for, study of and monitoring of asteroids and comets whose orbits periodically bring them close to Earth. The Minor Planet Center is funded by NASA and hosted by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, MA. JPL manages the Near-Earth Object Program Office for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. JPL is a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. More information about asteroids and near-Earth objects is available at:http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/, http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/asteroidwatch and via Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/asteroidwatch.

Courtesy of an article dated June 24, 2013 by NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory

5 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW WHEN PRICING YOUR SEED STARTUP ROUND, AND RECENT TRENDS IN DEALS, VALUATIONS AND EXITS

 

Pricing your seed round is more of an art than a science.

Of course, there are some benchmarks and comparables, but every startup is unique, and it’s easy for entrepreneurs to feel a little confused. Most entrepreneurs understandably fixate on the dilution impact of pricing their startup. But price can have much larger ramifications (good or bad) for your startup.

Based on my experience both raising a seed round for the company that I founded and now investing at the seed stage, here are 5 things to keep in mind:

Don’t attract the wrong investors

There are investors out there whose strategy to get into a round is to simply “pay up.” These funds will find the companies getting the most hype and bid aggressively. Remember that unlike the public market, seed-stage investors have to add value beyond just financial capital. The highest bidder is not always the best bidder. If anything, there is probably a negative correlation because the highest bidder is trying to buy into the round because they can’t get in otherwise. You should ask a simple question of yourself: would you still let this investor into your round if they paid 25 percent less?  If the answer is no, then you may want to think again.

But price indicates quality

Ever bought a more expensive item because you perceived it to be of higher quality? As consumers, we generally believe in the theory that “you get what you pay for.”  VCs are consumers too, and they are buying part of your company. There is not much information available to a seed-stage investor in terms of financials and metrics, so we are constantly looking for signals and proxies to help inform our decision.  Too low a price can be a “turn off” by suggesting a low quality opportunity. I know most VCs won’t openly admit it, but it’s true. Make sure you keenly understand what valuation your peers are getting so you are not underpricing yourself. At the very least, you want to fall in a reasonable range so you don’t set off any alarms.

Be wary of a down-round

Entrepreneurs by definition are huge optimists.  When you are raising your seed round you probably don’t even consider the possibility of a down round, a future round where your valuation is lower than the previous round.  Unfortunately, it happens. Especially if the economy takes a bad turn and risk capital dries up. Turns out it’s hard to predict when or if the economy will tank, and you can’t always wait for things to get better before you raise money. I know this first hand because we were out raising money with Polar in the middle of the 2008 recession. Fortunately, we didn’t have to do a down round, but fundraising wasn’t easy, even though our company was doing well.

It’s very frustrating when the vagaries of the macro economy dictates the destiny of your fledgling startup. And even if the macro economy doesn’t go into a tailspin, entrepreneurs typically set very high aspirations (sometimes to live up to the high seed valuation) for what they want to achieve by series A. For various reasons, entrepreneurs may fall short of achieving all their goals. This can lead to down rounds, or perhaps make it hard to raise any money at all. The higher your valuation in the seed round, the more exposed you are to a down round in the future. Down rounds are extremely detrimental to the company and you want to avoid them as much as you can.

Price shows hustle

You are the guardian of shareholder value. It’s a good sign if you are pushing for valuation at the top end of the range. It makes us seed investors comfortable that you’ll maximize value for the company and its stakeholders at every stage. Getting in cheap might buy me more of your company now, but you’ll just give it away in a future round if you are not a hustler.

Don’t limit your exit options

We have seen a surge in “acquihires” and relatively small exits recently. While entrepreneurs don’t start companies to be acquihired, you don’t want to preclude yourself from that option. Selling the company for $10 million when you own 20 percent is not an immaterial outcome for most first-time entrepreneurs. And you build street cred for your next rodeo. But if you raised your first round at a $10 million or more post, it’s possible that your investors may block the sale, especially if they feel that the company has significantly more potential. The higher the valuation at your seed round, the lower the likelihood of them supporting a small exit. If you build the next Google, your investors won’t complain about the seed-stage valuation. But the reality is that most startups will have a smaller outcome and you don’t want to limit those options.

Clearly, the price of your seed round will impact more than just how much you get diluted. Perhaps even more so. I wish I could give you an exact formula to calculate the optimal price, but each startup and situation is too unique to be precise. Barring a formula, keep the above points in mind, do your research and make sure the Price is Right!

COMMENTARY:  

Seed Startup and VC Firm/Angel Investor Due Diligence

Rest assured that VC's are going to conduct a thorough due diligence on the startups they plan on making a capital investment in.  Startup founders should also conduct due dligence on the VC's they are talking to before they approach VC's for startup capital.  You should understand the industry space they have invested in, the backgrounds of the founders and managing directors of the VC firms, the stage of development they invest at, and the amount of capital they are prepared to invest.  Don't be afraid to speak with the founders of startups that these angels and VC's have already invested in in order to understand their management style and their expectations from their startup founders.  I strongly urge that you review my blog posts (Click HERE) on venture capital and entrepreneuring to familiarize yourself with the different types of angels and VC firms, industry spaces where they are investing and current venture capital trends.  This will eliminate a lot of misunderstandings and wasted time and effort on your part.   

How Startup Valuations Work

The following infographic describes how the startup valuation process works in practicality.  

Click Image To Enlarge

Startup valuations rise even as VCs don’t get as many exits

Valuations at startup companies continue to increase, even though venture capitalists aren’t cashing out on deals as frequently as they’d like.

According to a new report by PitchBook, valuations in angel/seed, early stage and late stage all increased versus 2011 levels. Meanwhile, deal flow declined and the number of venture-backed companies completing IPOs or getting acquired fell to the lowest level since the third quarter of 2009.

Click Image To Enlarge

Virtually all of the decline can be attributed to weakness in corporate acquisitions from software companies, many of which are still sitting on piles of cash.

Click Image To Enlarge

According to Pitchbook.

“VC investors realized just 74 investments through corporate acquisitions in 1Q 2013, down from 102 in 4Q 2012 and the fewest since 2Q 2009.  We believe this may be an anomaly, however, as broader M&A activity has been fairly strong recently and corporations maintain large cash reserves and easy access to debt. ”

 

Click Image To Enlarge

Here’s a look at the specifics on valuations:

• Median pre-money valuation for Seed & Angel financings in 1Q 2013: $5.38 million. Up 23 percent over Q4.
• Median pre-money valuation for Early Stage financings in 1Q 2013: $14.5 million. Down seven percent over Q4.
• Median pre-money valuation for late stage financings in 1Q 2013: $67.8 million. Up 28 percent over Q4.

You can see the full report here:

PitchBook 2Q2013 VC Rundown Report

Courtesy of an article dated September 26, 2013 appearing in VentureBeat and an article dated April 17, 2013 appearing in GeekWire

WHAT ARE THE BEST DAYS AND TIMES TO POST ON INSTAGRAM?

Fortune 500 companies post photos on Instagram most frequently on Thursdays, according to a recent report by TrackMaven.

However, in terms of effectiveness (as measured as the number of total interactions per 1,000 followers), Thursdays are no better than any other day of the week for posting, the study found.

In general, Instagram engagement stays fairly consistent throughout the week, though there is a slight spike on Mondays and a slight dip on Sundays.

Click Image To Enlarge

Time of day is a similar story. Fortune 500 companies overwhelmingly put photos up on Instagram during business hours, with posts spiking between 3-4 PM EST.

However, Instagram engagement stays fairly consistent throughout the day and night. Posts during business hours are only 6% more effective than off-hour posts.

Click Image To Enlarge

Below, additional key findings from the report, which was was based on an analysis of the Instagram accounts of Fortune 500 companies.

Fortune 500 Instagram Adoption

• 24.6% of the Fortune 500 now have Instagram accounts (123 companies).
• Of the 123 Fortune 500 companies that have registered Instagram accounts, 91% (112 companies) have made at least one post on Instagram.
• The number of top brands opening Instagram accounts each month has increased consistently since the launch of the service.

Video

• There has not been a dramatic adoption of video on Instagram by Fortune 500 companies yet. In the most recent 30-day period examined in the report, there were 1,792 photos posted by these brands and only 74 videos.
• The average picture received 37 interactions per 1,000 followers, while videos lagged with an average of 24 interactions per 1,000 followers.

Hashtag Effectiveness

• The report found a strong correlation between the number of hashtags used and effectiveness of an Instagram post.
• Five hashtags seemed to be magic number for Fortune 500 brands. Posts with that many tags had the highest effectiveness (an average of 21.21 interactions per 1,000 followers).
• Posts with more than five hashtags started to decline in effectiveness, though they were still more popular than posts with 1-4 tags.

Click Image To Enlarge

About the research: The report was based on an analysis of the 123 active Instagram accounts of Fortune 500 companies. TrackMaven examined all of the posts by these companies since the launch of Instagram through September 17, 2013.

Courtesy of an article dated September 30, 2013 appearing in MarketingProfs

MASTER GUIDE FOR THE BEST TIMES TO TWEET ON TWITTER, POST UPDATES ON FACEBOOK, AND SEND EMAILS FOR THE BEST RESULTS

Best Time To Post Your Updates (Click Image To Enlarge)

WHEN IS THE BEST TIME TO TWEET ON TWITTER, POST ON FACEBOOK, AND EMAIL NEWSLETTERS TO REACH THE MOST PEOPLE? LET'S FIND OUT.

We’re pretty keen on optimal timing for social media here at Buffer, and I figured it was high time I collected all the information we have about online communication into one place. I’ve collected research and stats on Twitter, Facebook, email and blogging to help you find the best time to communicate with others in each format.

The tricky thing I’ve come across is that since the Web is still so new, a lot of the research available to us is conflicting. We really need more time and more studies to get definitive answers about what works best, and the fact that our audience members are constantly changing their own activity patterns makes it even harder to work out for sure. Looking at the latest social media stats seems to only confirm that.

So my suggestion would be to use this guide as just that--a guide to help you work out what to test for in your own audience, so that you can see what actually works best in your specific case.

Let’s get into the stats then.

FACEBOOK: FIND THE BEST TIME TO POST YOUR UPDATES.

When I posted about Facebook’s News Feed algorithm, one of the factors I talked about was time decay. This is simply the age of your post: How long has it been since you posted it? With the recent introduction of Story Bumping, time decay matters a lot less than how relevant your story is to the user in terms of getting into their News Feed (i.e., does it get in from a user or a page they interact with often, or have interacted with recently). Still, it’s good to keep time decay in mind, since it does make some difference: You won’t see posts from three months ago in your News Feed today.

In terms of specific days and times to post on Facebook, here are some of the stats I found:

Engagement rates are 18% higher on Thursdays and Fridays.

I love the way this was explained in Buddy Media’s study: As they put it, “the less people want to be at work, the more they are on Facebook!”

Best Day of the Week To Post Updates (Click Image To Enlarge)

Specific industries varied slightly according to which days of the week garnered the most engagement, but most of them update around the end of the week, from Wednesday to Friday.

Another study found that engagement was 32% higher on weekends, so the end of the week is definitely a good rough guide to start experimenting with.

A Recent Social Media Study Shows That Weekends Score Highest in Fan Engagement (Click Image To Enlarge)

The best time of day to post on Facebook is debatable, with times ranging from 1 p.m. to get the most shares to 3 p.m to get more clicks to the broader suggestion of anytime between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. It seems that this generally points to early afternoon being a solid time to post, with anytime after dinner and before work being a long shot.

For more Facebook stats and Facebook statistics, we’ve written a complete guide for you to check out.

TWITTER: WHEN IS THE BEST TIME TO TWEET FOR ENGAGEMENT VERSUS CLICKS?

Twitter is such a popular network for mobile users that it can be a bit tricky to lock down exactly when the best time to post is. Here are some suggestions from the research I’ve found:

Twitter engagement for brands is 17% higher on weekends.

Best Day of the Week to Post Tweets (Click Image To Enlarge)

If you’re tweeting from your company account, you might want to keep this in mind, especially if engagement is what you’re looking for. Buffer can help you spread out your tweets to post at the optimal times, so you don’t even have to work weekends to take advantage of this! Click-through rates are generally highest on weekends, as well as midweek, on Wednesdays.

On the other hand, an Argyle Social study showed that weekdays provide 14% more engagement than weekends, so this is definitely one you’ll want to test on your audience.

When Is Engagement The Highest For B2B and B2C (Click Image To Enlarge)

When we look at the time of day, retweets have been shown to be highest around 5 p.m.

Twitter Retweets Are The Highest At 5 p.m. During The Day (Click Image To Enlarge)

For click-throughs, the best times seem to be around noon and 6 p.m.

Twitter Clickthrough Rates Are The Highest around 6 p.m. During The Day (Click Image To Enlarge)

This could be due to lunch breaks and people looking for something to keep them occupied on the commute home after work.

Twitter tweets posted in the afternoon had a better chance of being clicked. (Click Image To Enlarge)

There are lots of Twitter users who primarily use a mobile device—rarely loading up Twitter on their desktops. Twitter did an interesting study of these users and found that they are 181% more likely to be on Twitter during their commute.

They’re also 119% more likely to use Twitter during school or work hours.

For more details on the latest Twitter stats and Twitter statistics, check out this guide.

EMAIL: FIND THE BEST TIME TO SEND FOR THE RIGHT CONTENT.

There’s been lots of research done on the best time to send emails, particularly in the case of email marketing. Some research done by Dan Zarrella from Hubspot broke down each time of day and worked out which type of emails work best for each period. Here’s what he found:

10 p.m.-6 a.m.: This is the dead zone, when hardly any emails get opened.

6 a.m.–10 a.m.: Consumer-based marketing emails are best sent early in the morning.

10 a.m.-noon: Most people are working, and probably won’t open your email.

Noon–2 p.m.: News and magazine updates are popular during lunch breaks.

2–3 p.m.: After lunch, lots of people buckle down and ignore their inbox.

3–5 p.m.: Property and financial-related offers are best sent in the early afternoon.

5–7 p.m.: Holiday promotions and B2B promotions get opened mostly in the early evening.

7–10 p.m.: Consumer promotions are popular again after dinner.

What I thought was really interesting about this breakdown is why each type of email is more popular at certain times. From 3–5 p.m., for instance, the reason people open financial and property-related emails is that they’re more likely to be thinking about their life situation and how to improve it. Understanding how these time blocks work can be a good start to sending your emails at just the right time.

And since 23.63% of emails are opened within an hour of being received, this is something we definitely want to get right.

For more general emails, open rates, click-through rates, and abuse reports were all found to be highest during early mornings and on weekends.

Click Rates By Hour (Click Image To Enlarge)

Open Rates By Hour (Click Image To Enlarge)

This probably means that most of us have more time to dedicate to our inbox during these periods, rather than during the day when we’re trying to get work done.

Click Rates By Day (Click Image To Enlarge)

Open Rates By Day (Click Image To Enlarge)

In a different study by MailChimp open rates were shown to be noticeably lower on weekends.

Email Opens By Day of Week (Click Image To Enlarge)

They also found that open rates increased after 12 p.m. and were highest between 2 p.m. and 5 p.m.

 
Email Opens By Time of Day (Click Image To Enlarge)

A GetResponse study backed this up by showing that open rates drop off slightly and click-through rates drop significantly on weekends.

GetResponse found that Thursday is the best day for both open rates and click-throughs.

Thursday is the best day for both open rates and click-throughs. (Click Image To Enlarge)

COMMENTARY:   If you are the head of marketing or social media, knowing the best time to tweet on Twitter, post updates on Facebook, and broadcast email, is invaluable to the success of your marketing campaigns.  

Courtesy of an article dated September 30, 2013 appearing in Fast Company

HOW A SWEDISH ARCHITECT TENGBOM, HOPES ITS "SMART STUDENT UNIT" PODS WILL SOLVE THE HIGH COST OF STUDENT HOUSING

A few years ago, Swedish student housing company AF Bostäder stuck a young woman from the city of Lund inside a tiny house-box--not even 10 meters squared. (Click Image To Enlarge)

HOUSING IS EXPENSIVE.  SO WHY NOT HAVE STUDENTS LIVE IN CUBES THEY CAN AFFORD? THAT'S THE IDEA BEHIND THE "SMART STUDENT UNIT." 

A few years ago, Swedish student housing company AF Bostäder had a young woman from the city of Lund inside live in a tiny house-box--not even 10 square meters large--to test the idea of a cheap, cheerful, and environmentally friendly “smart student unit" that included a toilet, kitchen, and bed.  Linda Camara of Tengbom Architects, the company behind the 2013 iteration of the living pod--a petite vision in pale wood offset with lime green plant pots, cushions and stools, says. 

“I think she still lives there.” 

It was to test the idea of a cheap, cheerful and environmentally friendly "smart student unit" that included a toilet, kitchen, and bed. (Click Image To Enlarge)

"I think she still lives there," says Linda Camara of Tengbom Architects, the company behind the 2013 iteration of the living pod--a petite vision in pale wood offset with lime green plant pots, cushions, and stools. (Click Image To Enlarge)

The premise for the cube, which has been in the works since 2007, is reasonable enough -- students live and die on cheap housing, but everyone needs a toilet. (Click Image To Enlarge)

The premise for the cube, which has been in the works since 2007, is reasonable enough: students live and die on cheap housing, but everyone needs a toilet. It’s taken six years to whittle the tiny houses down to the current cross-laminated wooden test model form. The large kitchen was squirreled away in the original blueprint, but Tengbom redesigned it as the prime area after student feedback. The current space-efficient design, complete with a patio and vaulted sleeping area, lowers standard rent rates by 50%--music to the ears of any economically bereft twentysomething.

It’s taken six years to whittle the tiny houses down to the current cross-laminated wooden test model form. (Click Image To Enlarge)

The current space-efficient design, complete with a patio and vaulted sleeping area, lowers standard rent rates by 50%--music to the ears of any economically bereft twentysomething. (Click Image To Enlarge)

Swedish housing regulations require student apartments to cover a minimum of 25 square meters, but Tengbom’s cubes, designed for students at the University of Lund, are the first known exception. (Click Image To Enlarge)

Swedish housing regulations require student apartments to cover a minimum of 25 square meters, but Tengbom’s cubes, designed for students at the University of Lund, are the first known exception.  Camara says.  

“We have a huge lack of student units in Sweden.  Social sustainability is to get more cost-efficient buildings fast and with high quality.”

"We have a huge lack of student units in Sweden," says Camara. "Social sustainability is to get more cost-efficient buildings fast and with high quality". (Click Image To Enlarge)

The units are built with cross-laminated wood sourced from Martinsons, a local manufacturer. (Click Imge To Enlarge)

The small surface area of each unit, combined with minimal transportation costs for local renewable construction materials, drives down the units’ carbon footprint. (Click Image To Enlarge)

And students won’t be freezing their socks off. "To endure the Swedish winter we need to insulate them," says Camara. "Cross laminated wood is enough for other types of houses or in warmer climate". (Click Image To Enlarge)

The units are built with locally sourced wood. The small surface area of each unit, combined with minimal transportation costs for local renewable construction materials, drives down the units’ carbon footprint. And students won’t be freezing their socks off.  Camara says.  

“To endure the Swedish winter, we need to insulate them.  Cross laminated wood is enough for other types of houses or in warmer climate, and the final version must last for 100 years at least.”

Each cube arrives on site as an Ikea-style flat pack--the test model took less than a week to put together.

Camara and the team at Tengbom will roll out a mini village in 2014, with an initial test run of 22 units arranged in blocks of eight. She’s thinking of ways to develop the project so tiny towns pop up on university campuses across Sweden, although Camara can’t promise that every unit will come with the swish green hammock hanging from the kitchen’s pseudo-ceiling in the prototype. She says.  

“The design you see here is like a concept car.  This is the dream version--and we will fight to make it real.”

The current smart student unit prototype is available for viewing until December 8 at The Virserum Museum in Sweden. For the Swedish students holding keys to the inaugural cube rollout, pooping, eating, and sleeping like a high-functioning hamster could be the new definition of the good life.

COMMENTARY:   The rapid rise in housing construction costs has driven up housing prices everywhere, not only in Sweden, but in all developed countries.  This often means higher rents, and Sweden is proof of this trend.  Linda Camara of Tengbom Architects, the firm that designed the first prototype for the "smart student unit" pod, appears to be on the right track.  I like minimalist design, functionality and practicality of the pods.  It is probably too confining for some individuals, but would be a perfect place for deep concentration and studying.  I could certainly see how some universites might flock to such a concept.  The shift to smaller, minimalist apartments is already here, especially in countries with high population densities and a lack of living space.  The pods do not take up a lot of room, and if each unit could be pre-fabricated, could be easily constructed by a couple of people in just a few days.  The units should be comfortable in both winter and summer, so they will require good insulation to keep the people cool in summer an warm in winter.  Looking forward to seeing the production model, and the finished product on university campuses throughout the world.   Linda, good luck to you.   

Courtesy of an article dated September 17, 2013 appearing in Fast Company Exist 

M-BLOCKS: SELF-ASSEMBLING ROBOTIC CUBES DEVELOPED BY MIT RESEARCHERS THAT CAN FORM RANDOM SHAPES

 

If the movies have taught us anything, it’s that the future isn’t just about robots–it’s about robots that can heal, adapt, and change their entire appearance at a moment’s notice. In a future directed by Michael Bay, that plays out as a semi-truck reconfiguring itself into a bipedal fighting machine halfway through a front-flip. For now, though, the action is a little more modest. In this clip, we see the real state of the art in self-assembling bots: a bunch of little magnetic cubes scuttling around a tabletop. It’s much cooler than it sounds.

 

M-Blocks are a new breed of self-assembling robot currently in development at MIT. Each cube is about an inch and a half across on each face, with a flywheel on the inside and an array of magnets on the outside. By spinning the flywheel at high speeds–up to 20,000 revolutions per minute–the self-contained units can scoot across tables and flip themselves through the air. Once they come close to another block, a clever system of self-aligning magnets attaches them to their partner. Seeing a single cube clamber on top of another isn’t especially impressive. But watch several move at once, with disparate parts moving independently and the larger whole rapidly taking a totally new form, and you can start to see a hazy path towards Optimus Prime (A character from the Transformers franchise).

MIT M-Blocks engineering team (L-to-R) John Romanishin, Daniela Rus and Kyle Gilpin (Click Image To Enlarge)

Kyle Gilpin, a researcher who’s working on the project along with John Romanishin and robotics professor Daniela Rus, says there are precedents for various aspects of the design, but the way M-Blocks puts them together is entirely new.  There are some bots that use magnets to bond, Gilpin points out, and others that use flywheels for movement, but there aren’t any that use these things towards an autonomously reconfiguring end. Plus, the setup is far more elegant than previous attempts at assembling bots, many of which had unwieldy external components.  Gilpin says.  

“In general, our system is unique because everything is exceedingly simple.  The modules in the video only have two motors–one to spin the flywheel and another to actuate the braking mechanism. Likewise, the bonding mechanism is completely passive. The magnets self-align and naturally draw neighboring M-Blocks together.”

MIT engineering team reveals the inner workings of their M-Blocks (Click Image To Enlarge)

That magnetic bonding system is worth a closer look. Each cube’s face has four magnets, making for a firm attachment when two modules are face-to-face. The edge of each cube has two additional cylindrical magnets, which freely rotate as the cubes approach each other, aligning north and south poles. These edges are also beveled, so when cubes are face-to-face, there’s a gap between these edge magnets; when one starts to flip itself to another face of its neighbor, the edge magnets come in direct contact, forming a strong anchor on which the blocks can flip. The beauty of this passive linking system is that it all happens on the outside of the modules, requiring nothing in the way of electronics or motors to control.

The team is currently working on giving the ‘bots a bit more autonomy. In the video, the cubes are being controlled by hand via a remote control.  Gilpin says.  

“As a result, it’s difficult to accurately control the flywheel velocity and the exact moment at which the brake is applied.”

If you thought controlling a toy helicopter was tough, try sticking a landing with a lurching magnetic cube. The latest generation of the modules have the computational capacity to automate the movement themselves, and the team is currently hashing out the code to drive it all.

But they’re also thinking towards real world applications, something that will require a more diverse collection of blocks. Some might have a single, more powerful flywheel, allowing them to move several blocks at once, dragging themselves and neighbors as one cohesive unit. The researchers are also considering passive, non-moving blocks battery blocks which could charge neighboring modules, giving the entire system the ability to travel greater distances and climb more challenge obstacles. Lacking motors of their own, these could be tossed around as needed by the other modules, Gilpin says.

That’s just the start, though. The team envisions M-Blocks with cameras or claw-like grippers–specialized blocks that could be carried by others and put in place for other jobs. Romanishin explained in a report from MIT.

“We want hundreds of cubes, scattered randomly across the floor, to be able to identify each other, coalesce, and autonomously transform into a chair, or a ladder, or a desk, on demand.”

When you’ve reached that point, you have to start asking: How many desks does it take to build an Autobot?

COMMENTARY:    M-Blocks remind me a lot of Modular Robotics' "Cubelets," toy blocks that snap together with magnets and unlock interesting electronic powers, like sensors, motors, and data displays.  I wrote about them in a blog post dated March 8, 2011.  The cubelets standard kit comes with 20 magnetic blocks ($300) that can be snapped together to make an endless variety of robots with no programming and no wires. You can build robots that drive around on a tabletop, respond to light, sound, and temperature, and have surprisingly lifelike behavior. But instead of programming that behavior, you snap the cubelets together and watch the behavior emerge like with a flock of birds or a swarm of bees.

M-Blocks are a lot more complicated than the Cubelets because each individual block contains their own logic board, motors, flywheels, breakers and magnets that operate autonomously (on their own without human intervention) allowing the M-Blocks to create patterns of blocks that take the form of shapes like a square, a stack, a pattern, and so forth.

What wasn't too clear in the article and video, is exactly how the M-blocks know what final shape they will take when they go into "construction" mode.  The fact that each M-block contains more moving parts than the cubelets described above, raises the issue of durability and mechanical breakdowns.  What happens when a fly wheel breaks, or the break motor malfunctions?  

M-Blocks are still in early development, and a lot of kinks still need to be worked out.  My personal belief is that MIT team should incorporate an industry standard operating system platform so that third party developers can create apps to give the M-Blocks a broad range of functionality similar to the Sifteo Cubes developed by another group of MIT robotic engineers.   You can read about the Sifteo Cubes in my blog posts dated March 21, 2011 and August 16, 2011. 

Courtesy of an article dated October 9, 2013 appearing in Wired 

GOOGLE REPORTS Q3 2013 REVS OF $14.9 BIL, NET INC OF $2.97 BIL, BUT MOTOROLA LOSES $250 MIL IN SPITE OF MOTO X LAUNCH

On Friday, October 18, 2013, Google Inc (NASDAQ.GOOG) shares rose +122.61 to a new high of $1011.41 or +13.80% following a stellar Q3 2013 earnings report the day before (Click Image To Enlarge)

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. – October 17, 2013 – Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced financial results for the quarter ended September 30, 2013.

Larry Page, Google CEO said. 

“Google had another strong quarter with $14.9 billion in revenue and great product progress.  We are closing in on our goal of a beautiful, simple, and intuitive experience regardless of your device.”

Q3 Financial Summary

Google Inc. reported consolidated revenues of $14.89 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2013, an increase of 12% compared to the third quarter of 2012. Google Inc. reports advertising revenues, consistent with GAAP, on a gross basis without deducting traffic acquisition costs (TAC). In the third quarter of 2013, TAC totaled $2.97 billion, or 24% of advertising revenues.

Operating income, operating margin, net income, and earnings per share (EPS) are reported on a GAAP and non-GAAP basis. The non-GAAP measures, as well as free cash flow, an alternative non-GAAP measure of liquidity, are described below and are reconciled to the corresponding GAAP measures at the end of this release.

• GAAP operating income in the third quarter of 2013 was $3.44 billion, or 23% of revenues. This compares to GAAP operating income of $2.74 billion, or 21% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2012. Non-GAAP operating income in the third quarter of 2013 was $4.34 billion, or 29% of revenues. This compares to non-GAAP operating income of $3.76 billion, or 28% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2012.
• GAAP net income including net income from discontinued operations in the third quarter of 2013 was $2.97 billion, compared to $2.18 billion in the third quarter of 2012. Non-GAAP net income in the third quarter of 2013 was $3.64 billion, compared to $2.96 billion in the third quarter of 2012.
• GAAP EPS including impact from net income from discontinued operations in the third quarter of 2013 was $8.75 on 339 million diluted shares outstanding, compared to $6.53 in the third quarter of 2012 on 333 million diluted shares outstanding. Non-GAAP EPS in the third quarter of 2013 was $10.74, compared to $8.87 in the third quarter of 2012.
• Non-GAAP operating income and non-GAAP operating margin exclude stock-based compensation (SBC) expense, as well as restructuring and related charges. Non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP EPS exclude the expenses noted above, net of the related tax benefits, as well as net income or loss from discontinued operations. In the third quarter of 2013, the expense related to SBC and the related tax benefits were $886 million and $207 million compared to $706 million and $155 million in the third quarter of 2012. In the third quarter of 2013, restructuring and related charges and the related tax benefits were $12 million and $3 million, compared to $313 million and $67 million in the third quarter of 2012. In addition, net income from discontinued operations in the third quarter of 2013 was $15 million, compared to net income from discontinued operations of $18 million in the third quarter of 2012.

Click Image To Enlarge

Q3 Financial Highlights

Revenues and other information – On a consolidated basis, Google Inc. revenues for the quarter ended September 30, 2013 were $14.89 billion, an increase of 12% compared to the third quarter of 2012.

Google Segment Revenues – Google segment revenues were $13.77 billion, or 92% of consolidated revenues, in the third quarter of 2013, representing a 19% increase over third quarter 2012 Google segment revenues of $11.53 billion.

• Google Sites Revenues – Google-owned sites generated segment revenues of $9.39 billion, or 68% of total Google segment revenues, in the third quarter of 2013. This represents a 22% increase over third quarter 2012 Google sites segment revenues of $7.73 billion.
• Google Network Revenues – Google’s partner sites generated segment revenues of $3.15 billion, or 23% of total Google segment revenues, in the third quarter of 2013, compared to $3.13 billion of Google network segment revenues in the third quarter of 2012.
• Other Google Revenues – Other revenues from the Google segment were $1.23 billion, or 9% of total Google segment revenues, in the third quarter of 2013. This represents an 85% increase over third quarter 2012 other Google segment revenues of $666 million.

Google Revenues By Source by Quarter - Q1 2011 Through Q3 2013 - Business Insider (Click Image To Enlarge)

Google Segment International Revenues – Google segment revenues from outside of the United States totaled $7.67 billion, representing 56% of total Google segment revenues in the third quarter of 2013, compared to 55% in the second quarter of 2013 and 53% in the third quarter of 2012.

• Google segment revenues from the United Kingdom totaled $1.39 billion, representing 10% of total Google segment revenues in the third quarter of 2013, compared to 11% in the third quarter of 2012.

Google Revenues - U.S. vs International by Quarter - Q1 2011 Through Q3 2013 (Click Image To Enlarge)

Foreign Exchange Impact on Google Segment Revenues – Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the second quarter of 2013 through the third quarter of 2013, our Google segment revenues in the third quarter of 2013 would have been $41 million higher. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the third quarter of 2012 through the third quarter of 2013, our Google segment revenues in the third quarter of 2013 would have been $135 million higher.

• In the third quarter of 2013, we recognized a benefit of $22 million to Google segment revenues through our foreign exchange risk management program, compared to $62 million in the third quarter of 2012.

Reconciliations of our non-GAAP international revenues excluding the impact of foreign exchange and hedging to GAAP international revenues are included at the end of this release.

Paid Clicks – Aggregate paid clicks, which include clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our Network members, increased approximately 26% over the third quarter of 2012 and increased approximately 8% over the second quarter of 2013.

Cost-Per-Click – Average cost-per-click, which includes clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our Network members, decreased approximately 8% over the third quarter of 2012 and decreased approximately 4% over the second quarter of 2013.

TAC – Traffic acquisition costs, the portion of revenues shared with Google’s partners, increased to $2.97 billion in the third quarter of 2013, compared to $2.77 billion in the third quarter of 2012. TAC as a percentage of advertising revenues was 24% in the third quarter of 2013, compared to 26% in the third quarter of 2012.

The majority of TAC is related to amounts ultimately paid to our Network members, which totaled $2.22 billion in the third quarter of 2013. TAC also includes amounts ultimately paid to certain distribution partners and others who direct traffic to our website, which totaled $755 million in the third quarter of 2013.

Motorola Mobile Segment Revenues – Motorola Mobile segment revenues were $1.18 billion, or 8% of consolidated revenues in the third quarter of 2013, compared to $1.78 billion, or 13% of consolidated revenues in the third quarter of 2012.

Elimination and Other – Beginning in Q3 2013, Google and Motorola segment revenues are impacted by intersegment transactions that are eliminated in consolidation. Additionally, segment revenues associated with certain products were recognized this quarter in the segment results, but deferred to future periods in our consolidated financial statements. Such intersegment revenues and deferred revenues were $63 million in the third quarter of 2013.

Other Cost of Revenues – Other cost of revenues, which is comprised primarily of manufacturing and inventory-related costs, data center operational expenses, amortization of intangible assets, and content acquisition costs, increased to $3.44 billion, or 23% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2013, compared to $3.19 billion, or 24% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2012.

Operating Expenses – Operating expenses, other than cost of revenues, were $5.04 billion in the third quarter of 2013, or 34% of revenues, compared to $4.61 billion in the third quarter of 2012, or 35% of revenues.

Amortization Expenses – Amortization expenses of acquisition-related intangible assets were $281 million for the third quarter of 2013, compared to $287 million in the third quarter of 2012. Of the $281 million, $153 million was as a result of the acquisition of Motorola, of which $116 million is included in Google segment results and $37 million is included in Motorola Mobile segment results.

Stock-Based Compensation (SBC) – In the third quarter of 2013, the total charge related to SBC was $886 million, compared to $750 million in the third quarter of 2012. We currently estimate SBC charges for grants to employees prior to September 30, 2013 to be approximately $3.29 billion for 2013. This estimate does not include expenses to be recognized related to employee stock awards that are granted after September 30, 2013 or non-employee stock awards that have been or may be granted.

Operating Income – On a consolidated basis, GAAP operating income in the third quarter of 2013 was $3.44 billion, or 23% of revenues. This compares to GAAP operating income of $2.74 billion, or 21% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2012. Non-GAAP operating income in the third quarter of 2013 was $4.34 billion, or 29% of revenues. This compares to non-GAAP operating income of $3.76 billion, or 28% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2012.

• Google Segment Operating Income – Google segment operating income in the third quarter of 2013 was $4.64 billion, or 34% of Google segment revenues. This compares to segment operating income of $3.95 billion in the third quarter of 2012, or 34% of Google segment revenues.
• Motorola Mobile Segment Operating Loss – Motorola Mobile segment operating loss in the third quarter of 2013 was $248 million, or -21% of Motorola Mobile segment revenues. This compares to segment operating loss of $192 million, or -11% of Motorola Mobile segment revenues in the third quarter of 2012.

Interest and Other Income, Net – Interest and other income, net, was $24 million in the third quarter of 2013, compared to $65 million in the third quarter of 2012.

Income Taxes – Our effective tax rate was 15% for the third quarter of 2013.

Net Income – Consolidated GAAP net income in the third quarter of 2013 was $2.97 billion, compared to $2.18 billion in the third quarter of 2012. Non-GAAP consolidated net income was $3.64 billion in the third quarter of 2013, compared to $2.96 billion in the third quarter of 2012. GAAP EPS in the third quarter of 2013 was $8.75 on 339 million diluted shares outstanding, compared to $6.53 in the third quarter of 2012 on 333 million diluted shares outstanding. Non-GAAP EPS in the third quarter of 2013 was $10.74, compared to $8.87 in the third quarter of 2012.

Cash Flow and Capital Expenditures – Net cash provided by operating activities in the third quarter of 2013 totaled $5.08 billion, compared to $4.0 billion in the third quarter of 2012. In the third quarter of 2013, capital expenditures were $2.29 billion, the majority of which was for production equipment, data-center construction, and real estate purchases. Free cash flow, an alternative non-GAAP measure of liquidity, is defined as net cash provided by operating activities less capital expenditures. In the third quarter of 2013, free cash flow was $2.79 billion.

We expect to continue to make significant capital expenditures.

A reconciliation of free cash flow to net cash provided by operating activities, the GAAP measure of liquidity, is included at the end of this release.

Cash – As of September 30, 2013, cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities were $56.52 billion.

Headcount – On a worldwide basis, we employed 46,421 full-time employees (42,162 in Google and 4,259 in Motorola Mobile) as of September 30, 2013, compared to 44,777 full-time employees (40,178 in Google and 4,599 Motorola Mobile) as of June 30, 2013.

COMMENTARY:   

Motorola Disappoints

In spite of Google's stellar Q3 2013 earnings report, Motorola, continues its downward decline, as it posted another $250 million dollar loss in spite of the Moto X launch -- evidently those personalized phones haven't been selling swiftly enough to stem the tide.  Page is optimistic about Motorola, as he waxed poetic about its voice recognition features and stated that the Android ecosystem is healthy -- it now numbers 1 billion devices strong, and continues at a pace of 1.5 million more activations per day. The problem? Well, Moto's manufacturing is up to speed, but the process of building marketing and distribution are what's holding Moto back.

Motorola's Moto X smartphone (Click Image To Enlarge)

Unveiled on August 1, 2013, the new 4.7-inch screen smartphone is aimed at market leaders like the iPhone and the Galaxy S phones. The Moto X features “all-day” battery life, a choice of colors and materials, and an instant-start camera, the company said today at a press event in New York. The Moto X is priced starting at $199 with a two-year contract and will be available on all the major U.S. carriers by the end of August or early September.

Bloomberg's panel of technology experts discusses Motorola's new Moto X smartphone designed to compete against the iPhone. Google acquired Motorola in 2011 and I covered it in my blog on September 7, 2011 (Click Image To View Video)

Dennis Woodside, chief executive officer of Motorola Mobility, said at the unveiling press event.  

“This is a relaunch of Motorola.  A year ago today, the Google team sat before a whiteboard and said, ‘What do we want to build? And how do we make it different?’ And this is it.”

The Moto X is assembled by contract manufacturer Flextronics International Ltd. (FLEX) at a former Nokia Oyj facility in Fort Worth, Texas.  Staffing the facility will require about 2,000 jobs, Woodside said in May.

Working initially with AT&T Inc. (T), customers can customize the colors of the front, back and accents of the Moto X on website Motomaker.com. The customization work is done in Fort Worth, and Motorola guarantees phone delivery in four days, said Osterloh. One of the custom options available is a wooden back made from a choice of rosewood, teak, bamboo or ebony.

Woodside said in an interview with Bloomberg Television.

“You can build this phone in 2,000 combinations.  By giving consumers the option to customize phones, that’s going to be fun and interesting.”

Boy, I thought Apple had gone crazy with its iPhone C color combinatins, but Motorola topped the iPhone C's color combinations by a factor of 10.

Google Still Leads In Search, But Market Share Is Flat

The company's share of the search market has remained relatively flat and its margins on desktop search advertising — Google's bread and butter — have declined as PCs are replaced by smartphones and tablets. Last quarter its cost per click, a metric of how much brands pay to advertise with Google, declined 6 percent. It fell again this quarter, down 8 percent year of year and 4 percent from last quarter. But the total volume of paid clicks (when people click on ads across Google's sites and on ad networks it serves) rose 26 percent year over year, offsetting that decline.

Google Bullish On Mobile Video

Page and Google are also bullish on mobile video, announcing that a full forty percent of YouTube's revenue now flows from phones and tablets. Just two years ago, the video service only got six percent of its cash from such devices. And, as YouTube has continued to beef up its video library -- be it livestreaming events or sponsored weeks of original content -- video continues to grow in importance to Google's overall bottom line. However, when asked about a rumored partnership to broadcast NFL games, the company remained coy. Nikesh Arora, Google's Chief Business Officer would only say that YouTube's always talking to content providers, but remains satisfied with its current business plan.

Chromebooks Big With U.S. Schools

As for the company's other main hardware, Chromebooks, well, things are looking up there too. Over 8,000 locations worldwide are now selling them, and twenty percent of US school districts have deployed Google-fied laptops. Gotta get 'em on the Google bandwagon early, right?

Google's Chromebook is a laptop that uses the Chrome operating system and all applications and user-generated files are stored in the Google cloud ecosystem (Click Image To Enlarge)

Search Ad Revenue Growth Slows

As Colin W. Gillis, a technology analyst at BGC, pointed out in Time on Friday morning, Google has seen a substantial deceleration from the 35 percent annual growth that the company delivered as recently as 2011, averaging around 20 percent in its last several quarters. Gillis says.

"We see the slowing core business as a one reason why Google is investing so heavily in new ventures as new products are needed to reignite revenue growth."

R&D 

all topics on the earnings call revolved around making money, there was some talk of spending it, too. Through the first three quarters of this year as compared to last, Google's R&D budget has increased by almost $1 billion. And, if Larry Page had his way, he'd be spending even more. Part of Page's job is to spend on long-term R&D -- projects that are "speculative" according to Page. You know, stuff like Calico, Project Loon and Google's self-driving cars. Current spending on such projects "isn't consequential for Google" according to Page, and he wants to do more of it.

Earnings Report Conference Call Transcript

For a complete transcript of Google management earnings report conference call, please click HERE.

Courtesy of a press release dated October 17, 2013 issued by Google, an article dated August 1, 2013 appearing in Bloomberg, an article dated October 17, 2013 appearing in Engadget, an article dated October 17, 2013 appearing in The Verge, an article dated October 17, 2013 appearing in Business Insider, an article dated October 17, 2013 appearing in SeekingAlpha, and an article dated October 17, 2013 appearing in VentureBeat

RECON, A GOOGLE GLASS COMPETITOR, HAS ALREADY SHIPPED 50,000 DEVICES, TARGETS ATHLETES LIKE CYCLISTS AND SKIERS

Click Image To Enlarge

RECON, WHICH BILLS ITSELF AS A GOOGLE GLASS FOR ATHLETES, HAS ALREADY SHIPPED THOUSANDS MORE DEVICES THAN GOOGLE AND SECURED INVESTMENT FROM INTEL CAPITAL TO BOOT.

Recon, maker of a $600 Google Glass-like wearable device marketed toward athletes,  reports it has already shipped 50,000 of its "Snow" model, geared toward skiers. That's many thousands more than the number of Glass devices Google has shipped to date. Google has instead chosen to roll out its device very slowly, to only a few thousand people to start.

 

Recon has also secured an investment from Intel Capital to continue development on what Recon calls "the world's most advanced wearable computer." Although the debate over which wearable device can claim the title of "most advanced" is still up for discussion, Recon's current niche is high-performance athletes, which means it's more durable than the shatter-prone  Google Glass.

Intel VP Mike Bell, who manages the corporation's new devices group, said.  

"In Recon Instruments, we see compelling technology and a solid strategy to capitalize on the wearable revolution.  This is an area of significant focus for Intel Capital, and our investment in Recon Instruments is a key part of our approach to innovation in this emerging space."

COMMENTARY:   In terms of design, Recon glasses are reminiscent of the futuristic  Oakley sports shades that are so popular with many top tier sports professionals. An interesting difference between the Recon Jet and Glass is that the former puts the display lens at the lower part of the wearer's vision rather than at the top.

According to a statement on the Recon Jet website,

"Research has shown that looking down is an easier eye movement than looking up. Jet is also designed for outdoor use, where looking up could result in looking directly at the sun, something we want to avoid."

Another important difference is that the Recon Jet is controlled only by a touch-pad on the side of the device, no voice control feature is included.

As for the technical specifications, the Recon Jet is equipped as follows:

• 720p HD video camera. 
• 3D accelerometer. 
• Built-in microphone and speakers. 
• 8GB of flash memory. 
• Wi-Fi and Bluetooth capability 
• Micro USB port. 

The device functions on an open platform that anyone can develop apps for, but right out of the box, the Pilot Edition of the Recon Jet comes with software that allows users to track their speed, distance, and heart rate. Users can also connect the glasses to their smartphone to see SMS alerts and caller ID.

And while you might think that Google wouldn't want to give exposure to a potential competitor, it appears that the company's reps were welcome at a Google recent conference. Recon Instruments CEO, Dan Eisenhardt, said,

"We introduced Recon Jet to the developer community at the Google I/O tech conference last month. To say the response exceeded our expectations would be a massive understatement."

Pricing for the early adopter Pilot Edition was $499, a deal that expired on July 21, to coincide with the end of this year's Tour De France event.  Delivery of the device is expected to be December 2013 through early 2014.

RECON Jet Pilot Edition

The advantages of the Recon Jet over Google Glass are apparent:

• Cheaper price (for now). 
• First to market. 
• Open platform (no worries about Google controlling your personal data). 
• Targeting athletes is smart. 

Athletes have been looking for something like this for a while now, particularly now that wearable performance trackers are taking off.  But the notion of a normal personal walking around wearing Glass in the same way that they might utilize a smartphone has struck some as impractical at best, and a capital offence against fashion at worst.

George Hincape wearing a pair of RECON Jet glasses (Click Image To Enlarge)

And, beyond all the other considerations, Recon Jet is simply the best alternative for anyone who wants most of the facility of something like Glass, but without having to lock yourself into Google's cloud apps that spread your data throughout the search company's software ecosystem.

Given those factors, the Recon Jet has a lot going for it.  However, the major advantage Google has is that scores of people have been enthusiastically testing Glass in the public eye for months now. In fact, in July Google uploaded a video of Wimbledon tennis pro Bethanie Mattek-Sands training with Glass, a clear indication that the company is trying to get more sports pros to adopt the device.

RECON Jet Features (Click Image To Enlarge)

Tour de France veteran George Hincapie testing out the Recon Jet in the video below.

 

RECON Jet Technical Specifications

Recon Jet is a powerful standalone microcomputer with the onboard processing power, suite of sensors and networking capabilities you would expect from a tablet or smartphone. It's open platform and SDK allows developers to create apps for any activity where information, relayed direct-to-eye, changes the game.

ONBOARD SENSOR FRAMEWORK	9-Axis sensors • 3D accelerometer • 3D gyroscope • 3D magnetometer Pressure sensor • Altimeter & barometer application Ambient temperature sensor Optical touch sensor for UI control Works in all weather conditions, and with gloves on
PROCESSOR SUBSYSTEM	1 GHz Dual-Core ARM Cortex-A9 On-board memory • 1GB DDR2 SDRAM  • 8GB flash
ULTRA-COMPACT DISPLAY	Wide screen 16:9 WQVGA display Virtual image appears as 30" HD display at 7' Power-saving sleep mode High contrast and brightness for readability in high ambient lighting
NETWORKING SUBSYSTEM	Wi-Fi (IEEE802.11a/b/g/n) Bluetooth 4.0 (Bluetooth Smart) • Apple MFi Bluetooth support GPS • MEMS GPS/INS Kalman filtering fusion algorithm ANT • Support for connectivity of up to 8 ANT+ peripherals Micro USB • Device charging/power • Data transfer
EMBEDDED  AUDIO & VIDEO	HD camera Integrated speaker and microphone

Courtesy of an article dated September 27, 2013 appearing in Fast Company and an article dated June 27, 2013 appearing in DVICE