In the year 2020, mobile will surpass TV ad spending by more than $6 billion, according to our latest ad spending forecast. By 2020, the channel will represent 43% of total media ad spending in the US—a greater percentage than all traditional media combined.
Click Image To Enlarge
Martin Utreras, VP of Forecasting at eMarketer says.
"Even the strongholds of TV, such as live sports and news, are starting to move online, and people are consuming them on the go through mobile devices. Audiences continue to abandon traditional media, and ad dollars follow."
According to our estimates, mobile will account for $76.17 billion of US media ad spending in 2018. That's more than TV ($69.87 billion)—and it's significantly more than print ($18.74 billion), radio ($14.41 billion) and out-of-home ($8.08 billion).
By the end of the forecasting period (2022), mobile ad spending is expected to more than double that of TV. The channel will make up $141.36 billion of US media ad spending, while TV will account for $68.13 billion.
Utreras said.
"With respect to TV, content like news and sports are starting to move online, so we expect to see a shift in dollars for those categories as well. At the same time, we increased growth for mobile, as companies like Facebook and Google are still driving double-digit growth. Part of that is driven, of course, by digital video growth coming from platforms like YouTube and Facebook."
COMMENTARY: according to Kantar Media data shared with Marketing Dive. Total U.S. ad spend in 2018 reached $151 billion, a 4.1% increase over 2017.
The top 5 brand advertisers for 2018 included:
Procter & Gamble remained the top advertiser for 2018, increasing spend by 4.7% to reach $2.9 billion. P&G was displaced by Samsung as the top spender among marketers in Ad Age research from late 2018 that takes a wider look at spend across advertising, marketing services and digital marketing.
AT&T spent $2.2 billion, a 6.1% decrease over 2017.
Berkshire Hathaway with $2 billion, a 4.8% increase over 2017.
Comcast shpent $1.9 billion, a 21% increase over 2017.
Amazon, which ranked No. 5, increased its ad spend by 72.5%, reaching $1.8 billion.
The top 5 advertising sectors for 2018 included:
Retail was the No 1 spender at $17.8 billion, a 5.4% increase over 2017.
Automotive ranked No. 2 with $14.3 billion, a 3.3% drop over 2017
Telecom ranked No 3 with $8.6 billion, a 1% increase over 2017.
Political and Organizations ranked No 4 with $6.7 billion, a 93% increase over 2017.
According to eMarketer, mobile ad spend will top $93 billion in 2019, over $20 billion more than what will be spent on TV. With so much money flowing into mobile advertising, what will be the big changes and trends in the mobile landscape in 2019?
Click Image To Enlarge
What are major trends outside of advertising that will affect the mobile advertising ecosystem? The trend toward privacy regulation will likely continue in 2019, which will affect data use. Consumers are also looking for ways to reduce screen time, which may increase opportunities in audio advertising. One trend that won’t affect advertising yet is 5G, which won’t come on line with any scale until 2020, but it will begin to affect investments in media and ad tech.
What will happen in mobile video in 2019? Many of the large platforms will double down on high-quality video shows geared for a mobile audience. This will increase demand for vertical video. Video advertising will also become less skippable and more interactive.
How will artificial intelligence (AI) influence mobile advertising? It’s hard to limit the impact of artificial intelligence to just a few areas, but three important ones will be personal assistants, modeling consumer paths to purchase and augmented reality (AR)—particularly visual search. The role of personal assistants might be the most important, since tools such as Siri, Google Assistant and Alexa will tie the mobile phone more deeply to the rest of our device ecosystem.
U.S. ad spending expanded 4.1% in 2018, according to final estimates released by WPP's Kantar Media unit. That is only slightly off the 4.2% expansion in the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Advertisers spent $151.7 billion in 2018, across the media tracked by Kantar Media -- the highest total ever.
The expansion comes despite a 3.3% erosion in the automotive category -- traditionally one of the U.S. ad industry's largest categories -- and relatively modest growth in top categories such as retail (No. 1), telecommunications (No. 3) and pharmaceuticals (No. 9).
Thanks to record spending for the 2018 midterm elections, political ad spending surged 93.1% and ranked as the No. 8 category.
Media also became one of the highest-growth ad categories, expanding 27.3% to rank as the tenth-largest ad category in the U.S.
Top advertisers essentially mirrored their category movement, with AT&T and Pfizer both declining, and Amazon jumping 72.5% to rank as the nation's fifth-largest advertiser last year.
Click Image To Enlarge
Courtesy of an article dated October 16, 2018 appearing in eMarketer and an article dated January 24, 2019 appearing in Marketing Dive and an article dated January 24, 2019 appearing in MediaPost Media Daily News and an article dated December 6, 2018 appearing in eMarketer
Over the last two decades of building and running businesses, and the last couple of years working full time with dozens of startup founders and CEOs on their strategies and funding plans in my consultancy business, I have observed that there are a common set of reasons that startups struggle and fail, and a consistent set of factors that make startup companies successful.
I wondered if my observations were supported by hard data, and my curiosity around startup success and failure eventually got the best of me. I decided to do some in-depth investigation around this topic. I wondered if there were any research studies that showed why startups succeed and fail? I found several articles that were filled with unsubstantiated opinions and a few sources that had really great hard research around the topic.
Why do companies fail?
According to an article in FastCompany, "Why Most Venture Backed Companies Fail," 75 percent of venture-backed startups fail. This statistic is based on a Harvard Business School study by Shikhar Ghosh. In a study by Statistic Brain, Startup Business Failure Rate by Industry, the failure rate of all U.S. companies after five years was over 50 percent, and over 70 percent after 10 years.
This study also asked company leadership the reason for business failure, giving a list of four main reasons for failure with sub-categories below those. They also gave a list of 12 leading management mistakes. It is worth checking out the details. This research-based analysis confirmed some of my observations. I bracket the Statistic Brain finding into seven key reasons for that entrepreneurs experienced business failure:
Lack of focus
Lack of motivation, commitment and passion
Too much pride, resulting in an unwillingness to see or listen
Taking advice from the wrong people
Lacking good mentorship
Lack of general and domain-specific business knowledge: finance, operations, and marketing
Raising too much money too soon
All of these focus on the decision-making of the entrepreneur and general business knowledge.
In another study, CB Insights looked at the post-mortems of 101 startups to compile a list of the Top 20 Reasons Startups Fail. The focus was on company level reasons for failure. I think this list is instructive, but each of these reasons for failure is due to a failure in leadership at some level. The top nine most significant from this study are:
No market need
Ran out of cash
Not the right team
Got outcompeted
Pricing/cost issue
Poor product
Need/lack business model
Poor marketing
Ignore customers
Notice that all of these are business- and team-related issues, even the ones that relate to the product. Issues like there are always tied to leadership and the leader’s ability to build a strong team and drive a business model and business thought process and discipline. Also, keep in mind, if running out of money is the ultimate reason for failure, there are always other factors that cause this result.
Why do startups succeed?
Next, I looked for sources of information of why businesses were successful. I found some good research from Harvard Business School, Performance Persistence in Entrepreneurship, which suggest that serial entrepreneurs that have prior success are more likely to have success, and that the best VCs are good at picking serial entrepreneurs. However, that really didn’t answer my question about the qualities of the entrepreneur.
The best comprehensive research that helped to answer the “reasons for success” question that I could find was from The Ecommerce Genome by Compass in their Startup Genome report, which looked at 650 internet startups. Although this research is tech industry specific, I still think it is very instructive. The report stated 14 indicators of success. Some of the 14 were a bit redundant, but you should review the report yourself. This analysis also confirmed some of my observations. I bracketed these 14 indicators into nine key factors for success:
Founders are driven by impact, resulting in passion and commitment
Commitment to stay the course and stick with a chosen path
Willingness to adjust, but not constantly adjusting
Patience and persistence due to the timing mismatch of expectations and reality
Willingness to observe, listen and learn
Develop the right mentoring relationships
Leadership with general and domain specific business knowledge
Implementing “Lean Startup” principles: Raising just enough money in a funding round to hit the next set of key milestones
Balance of technical and business knowledge, with necessary technical expertise in product development
Are the reasons for success the opposite of those for failure?
There are things that you must possess to be a successful entrepreneur, but they won't guarantee success. That said, it stands to reason that if you fixed the reasons for business failure, you would at least improve your chances of success. So, I decided to look at the side-by-side comparison of the reasons for failure and the factors for success.
If you look at both the reasons for failure and the factors for success, it is clear that commitment to a plan is key. This, of course, implies having a plan. This does not mean that you are completely inflexible, but you can stay the course. This is why the most successful companies have one or two pivots. I do not think that every little business adjustment or fine-tuning as a pivot.
A true pivot is a change in course of direction that results in a material change in the product-market strategy. It could be along the product axis or the market axis, but it has to be enough of a change that it really requires an adjustment in strategy and a corresponding adjustment in resource allocation. At least, that’s my definition. Passion and motivation are the obvious factors. Every entrepreneur, business coach, consultant, advisor, newscaster, investor and industry analyst talks about passion. Steve Jobs is quoted all the time about this. It’s probably become too cliché and overused at this point.
What I like about this analysis is that it goes to the root of the passion. People that are successful believe in what they are doing. The successful entrepreneur feels that they can make an impact and a difference in the world. There is so much inertia and negativity around getting a startup off the ground, much less getting it to “escape velocity,” that if you don’t have this deep-seated commitment to making an impact, you will surely give up. Successful entrepreneurs are competitive. They play to win, and they hate to lose. This trait may show-up differently with different personality types, but I have never met a successful entrepreneur that doesn’t have a competitive spirit and a will to win.
The next two things go hand-in-hand. I kept them separate since I think mentorship is so important, and it has played such a huge role in my career success. Just because you are willing to learn does not mean that you are willing to seek a mentor and listen to their guidance. By the way, I’m not advocating that you take every piece of advice and guidance from your mentors, but if you have selected strong mentors that have significant domain, technical or business expertise, you should at least consider thoughtfully consider what they have to say. Otherwise, why have them around as a mentor? It gets to humility. It’s one of those things when you think you have it, you don’t.
Successful startups are businesses. It therefore stands to reason that you need to establish and implement solid fundamental business principles and practices to improve your chances of success. Many technical founders fall in love with their product idea and consciously or unconsciously believe that if they build a better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to their door. However, both the success and failure studies show that you need leadership in the company with general and domain-specific business knowledge to be successful. Of course, you also need to have strong technical expertise in your chosen product development area.
Does this mean that a technical founder cannot be successful as a CEO? No, it doesn't. Look at Dr. Irwin Jacobs, the co-founder and founding CEO of Qualcomm, as a classic example. Dr. Jacobs is a brilliant engineer and former professor at MIT. However, he also has a brilliant business mind and a lot of business knowledge. Prior to Qualcomm, Dr. Jacobs ran another company, MA-Com, so he had experience running a company. He also surrounded himself with a strong management team. There are many other examples of this success formula, but there are far more where there is a seasoned businessperson who has domain expertise leading the company, and a strong technical team driving product development. Steve Jobs (Apple, NeXT, and Pixar) is the classic example as a business-oriented founder. Meg Whitman (eBay) and Eric Schmidt (Google) are great examples of CEOs who were brought into companies at an early stage to complement an exceptional team of technical founders.
Finally, having a clear and realistic idea of how long things take, setting intermediate milestones for every 12 to 18 months, and raising just enough money it to get to the next set of key milestones, is not only important to capital efficiency, it is also important for success.
How do I become a member of the $100 million club?
Interestingly, according to the Kauffman Institute, in its article The Constant: Companies that Matter, the pace at which the United States produces $100-million companies has been stable over the last 20 years despite changes in the economy. The study sates, “Anywhere from 125 to 250 companies per year (out of roughly 552,000 new employer firms) are founded in the United States that reach $100 million in revenues.” My former company, Entropic, achieved this status. How do you become part of that club? You need some luck and a good sense of timing. However, as said by the Roman philosopher Seneca, “Luck is what happens when preparedness meets opportunity.”
Beyond that, you need a plan, persistence, perseverance, a willingness to be flexible, and a world-class team. You also need to be frugal, bright, and cultivate strong mentors. The best way know to do all these things well and efficiently is to follow a systematic process where you plan, commit, track results, promote accomplishments and raise the necessary capital, or "fuel in the tank," to drive the growth of your startup.
Plan. Commit. Win.
COMMENTARY: As a consultant it always pains me when a startup client launches successfully and gains traction, but never seems to quite "cross the chasm" that all startups encounter, and must cross in order to "get to the next level." Crossing the chasm simply means helping a product, service or technology move from "early adopters" to a larger market segment, sometimes called the "early majority," in the Product Adoption Curve (see below).
Product Adoption Curve
The product adoption curve is a standard model that reflects who buys your products and when.
Think of it as the big picture view of your product adoption. It takes the product lifecycle and considers what happens at different points.
In most product adoption models, there are five distinct stages. Each stage represents an arbitrary amount of time, so what’s most important here is the process as a whole.
Now let’s break this down step by step, stage by stage.
Stage 1. Innovators
The innovators are the first group of people to invest in your product.
This is a unique group. People who buy super early are usually obsessed with technology and want to keep up with the cutting edge of technology. When the first Apple iPhone was first launched on July 29, 2007, the innovators were the very first to buy the iPhone.
What’s most important about the innovators group is its size. You might have noticed that it’s small. That’s completely normal.
This is why you might only get a few sales immediately after you launch. You’ll typically get about 2.5% of your total sales from innovators.
The Innovators
Stage 2. Early Adopters
At some point, you’ll see a swell in sales, and you’ll start to get a steadier conversion rate.
This is probably because the early adopters have arrived.
Like innovators, early adopters tend to be ahead of everyone else, willing to test the waters.
Early Adopters
Although early adopters are similar to innovators, there are some important differences.
It could be the case that early adopters have purposely waited to buy your product.
Whereas innovators are fine with rushing in and testing out something new, early adopters are a bit more hesitant. They still want to try something new, but they want a few reviews to consult.
Then again, it could be the case that they just found out about your product.
Expect your percentage of adoption to go up to about 13.5% or so.
Stage 3. Early Majority
Here’s when your product really gets some momentum going.
You’ve got a good amount of sales from innovators and early adopters. At this point, usually an even larger group sweeps in and gives you a heck of a lot more sales. Specifically, about 34%.
The people in the early majority are usually pragmatic and will only buy something once it’s been road-tested (at least a little bit) and has proven its value.
Early Majority
This is the beginning of your product’s peak. Maybe it’s gained traction with more marketing or word of mouth.
Stage 4. Late Majority
At stage 4, your product has been out for a while, and there’s widespread use.
However, there are still some people who are a bit skeptical of your product. Once they’ve put their worries to rest, they buy your product, and these people are usually in the late majority or laggards.
Late Majority
At some point during the early or late majority phase, you’ll have your peak where you get more sales than ever, and your product is at the height of its popularity.
Interestingly, in terms of adoption rates, the early and late majorities are usually roughly equal, around 34%.
Stage 5. Laggards
These are the people who buy your product after all the hype has died down. Sometimes, laggards purchase a product years after it’s been released.
Laggards might be extreme skeptics or people who have only heard about your product a long time after you launched it. Whatever the reason, these people don’t buy until much later in the product lifecycle.
The Laggards
Surprisingly, this is a pretty big group. 16% of your product adoption will come from laggards.
Try to wrap your head around the fact that laggards have a higher adoption rate than early adopters.
Change Your Marketing as Your Product Ages
At each stage of the product adoption curve, it’s likely there’s going to be certain demographics buying your product.
For example, innovators are more likely to buy on impulse, while buyers in the late majority will do lots of research before purchasing.
And as your product gets older, it will become more well-known. So you might start out with a product no one knows but end up with a product everyone and their brother has heard of.
Given these facts, consider changing your marketing messages as your product ages.
The Apple iPhone Marketing Messages Over Time
The marketing of each successive version of the Apple iPhone illustrates how Apple changed its marketing message to appeal to innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards.
A commercial for iPhone 2showed off a lot of the hip new features: music, email, and Internet browsing, to name a few.
iPhone 2 TV Commercial
This obviously appealed to a younger, more tech-savvy audience.
Then in 2010, three years after the first iPhone launched in 2007, the iPhone 4 came out with a commercial that featured two grandparents celebrating their granddaughter’s graduation:
iPhone 4 TV Commercial
Apple wanted to show that even grandparents (who may not have understood smartphones back in 2010) could benefit from the iPhone. This is important because older consumers are typically late adopters.
Apple’s strategy was clear: Begin by showcasing all the bells and whistles, then open up the audience to include more types of customers.
In the same way, you should think about what your marketing should look like at each stage of the product adoption curve.
For example, when the innovators and early adopters come rolling in, your marketing should clearly describe the value and benefits of your product.
Later on, perhaps in the late majority stage, you can utilize customer testimonials and reviews. This can help address the skepticism that later adopters typically have.
Think about addressing the common questions that each group has, innovators will ask themselves what’s so unique about your product, while the early majority wants to know what other people think about your product and why it’s useful.
Thinking like this can completely change your marketing. By sending a customized message every step of the way, you’ll battle objections and questions head-on.
Know How to Overcome The Chasm
In most product adoption curves, there’s a point that can make or break the success of the product.
It’s called the chasm. It’s the point between the early adopterstage and the early majority stage.
The Chasm
As the chart above represents, crossing the chasm means breaking into the mainstream market. It’s one of the most difficult aspects of product adoption, but it’s one of the most important aspects to get right. There’s even a bestselling book on the topic––Crossing the Chasm.
Crossing the chasm is particularly tough to do for a few reasons. One reason is that as your product ages and grows, your audience will have higher expectations. Specifically, your potential customers will want increasingly better reasons to buy your product. You have to be ready to meet these demands throughout your product’s lifecycle, but it’s especially important in getting past the chasm.
As impulse buyers, the innovators and early adopters didn’t need huge reasons to buy your product. But to get the early majority to convert, that’s exactly what you’ll need. You have to think about your branding and not just your product. You have to offer value and not just features.
Another reason for the difficulty is the possible necessity of pivoting. In other words, to cross the chasm you may need to take a new angle for your campaign. Early on, you may be hedging on the idea behind your product. Early adopters are cool with that, but the early majority wants consistency. In other words, to cross the chasm you may need to take a new angle for your campaign. Early on, you may be hedging on the idea behind your product. Early adopters are cool with that, but the early majority wants consistency.
The Chasm
If you’re at the chasm right now, you might need to pivot yourself or even improve your product.
Don’t Forget The Laggards
You can’t stop after your product has hit its pinnacle and is riding the waves of success. It's important to remember, the second largest adoption group is laggards, coming in at 16%. A lot of people will be buying your product well after the hype dies down, and you can’t forget or alienate this audience.
Laggards are often skeptics, so at the end of your product lifecycle, your marketing should be laser-focused on overcoming objections. Think about it––you’re marketing to people who resist change and may not even want to be a customer. They’re going to need awesome reasons to invest in your brand. (A slew of positive testimonials, reviews, and press mentions will come in handy for this.)
Time also plays an important role. Think back to the iPhone example; sure, older folks are commonly seen with iPhones, but it’s been a decade since the device’s initial release. It might take a lot of time and exposure to your brand for laggards to adopt your brand.
Finally, you’ll also need to brace for the declining sales that inevitably occur at the end of the product life cycle. If your brand is experiencing one or more of these symptoms (see below) listed in the Product Life Cycle chart, its time to evaluate whether you can extend its life by introducing an improved version, replace the product with an entirely new product or dump the brand or line entirely.
Product Life Cycle
Courtesy of an article appearing in September 2014 issue of Entrepreneur and an article dated October 23, 2017 appearing in The Daily Egg and an article dated October 23, 2017 appearing in The Daily Egg
Snap reported quarterly financial results for its first time as a public company on Wednesday, posting revenue that missed estimates and slower-than-expected user growth.
Shares plummeted more than 20 percent on Thursday. The company spent $2 billion on stock-based compensation expenses after its initial public offering, widening net losses for the quarter to $2.2 billion.
CEO Evan Spiegel got a $750 million bonus for taking Snap public. He told analysts on a conference call that the company was focused on improving quality for users during the first quarter, especially for those with Android mobile phones.
Despite the steep loss during the quarter, Snap is "still in investment mode," the company's chief financial officer, Drew Vollero, said on a conference call with analysts.
The Numbers
Revenue: $150 million reported vs. $158 million expected by a Thomson Reuters consensus estimate.
Global DAUs: 166 million reported vs. 167.3 million expected by StreetAccount.
ARPU: 90 cents reported vs. 90 cents per share expected by StreetAccount.
Loss of $2.31 a share including compensation expenses.
Analysts at Thomson Reuters estimate an adjusted loss of 20 cents per share, wider than the 19 cents expected.
That's compared with revenue of $38.8 million in the year-ago period.
Click Image To Enlarge
Click Image To Enlarge
Amid trouble at Facebook and Google, unprofitable underdog Snapchat aims for engagement
As the company behind the viral ephemeral messaging app and Spectacles glasses, Snap's IPO was the biggest technology offering since Alibaba.
And it's growing at an extraordinary rate: Revenue rose 286 percent year over year in the first quarter. Daily active users rose 36 percent from the year-ago period, and average revenue per user grew 181 percent.
More than 3 billion Snaps were made daily in the first quarter, the company said, up from 2.5 billion in the third quarter of 2016. Users spent an average of 30 minutes a day on Snapchat, the company's chief strategist, Imran Khan, said on the conference call, and cited Nielsen data showing that many Snap users could not be reached by traditional TV channels.
Khan told CNBC.
"We made good progress this quarter improving the performance and quality of our Snapchat application, especially on Android, which has helped result in increased net user adds and engagement. We still have a lot of work to do, and are excited about the potential from continued performance improvements."
Click Image To Enlarge
But since its IPOin early March, Snap has faced an uphill battle to convince Wall Street it can make money with advertising, even with Facebook and Googledominating the market.
Spiegel said that automation will help the company make more money for advertisers.
Facebook, in particular, has pushed aggressively into Snap's turf. Boss Mark Zuckerberg told analysts that Instagram Stories has 200 million daily active users, and WhatsApp Status has more than 175 million daily active users.
As a whole, Facebook has 1.28 billion daily active users, nearly eight times as many as Snapchat.
Other revenue sources, like Spectacles, have hardly made a dent in the company's business. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Reuters expect Snap to post a per-share loss through the end of 2018.
Snap has not made great gains in the markets, trading mostly below the high of $29.44 in its first week of trading. Indeed, the stock fell as low as $17.07 after hours, just 7 cents above its IPO price, as shares changed hands in heavy volume.
Snap should have set its expectations lower, Art Hogan, chief market strategist at Wunderlich Securities, told CNBC's "Closing Bell" on Wednesday. He explained that a company's first earnings report as a public company is "really dependent" on executives giving realistic guidance. But that's just part of the growing pains of becoming a public company, Hogan said.
COMMENTARY: I won't lie to you, I am not a fan of startups with unproven or unsustainable business models and no evidence of profitability. In my opinion, Snap Inc has many similarities to Twitter: 1) user growth slowing down at time of IPO filing, 2) lack of profitability and 3) small market focus (primarily Millennials). Snaps has positioned itself as a "camera app" that allows Millennials, its core user demographics, to share photos that automatically disappear.
In a blog post dated October 10, 2016, I commented on Snap Inc's proposed $25 billion IPO. Like Twitter before it, I had a lot of reservations about the Snap IPO, because there were already strong signs that user growth was slowing down, and many analysts like myself, felt that Snap's business model, which depended almost entirely on advertising, was unsustainable. Furthermore, Snap derived the majority of its ad revenue from the U.S., so in order to sustain growth, this required expanding its user base internationally.
Snap is very slow in providing advertisers with the tools they need to target potential customers, and this is the same thing that plagued Twitter's ad revenue growth. On May 4, 2017, Snap announced a suite of tools to help advertisers market to its users more effectively. If you ask me, they should've done this much sooner.
For those of you who like reading the minutes of Snap Inc's Q1 2017 earnings conference call with investors, you will find it all below:
Snapchat is opening itself up to advertisers of all sizes with new buying tools
According to an announcement on May 4, 2017, starting this June, Snap is going a step further by flinging wide its gates to advertisers of all sizes and budgets with a new suite of self-service tools. The move could help considerably grow Snap's fledgling ad business, which is expected to reach $1 billion in revenue this year.
Releasing a self-service ads manager is intended to erase any friction that may be keeping advertisers off Snapchat, a company spokesperson told Business Insider. Snap expects larger buyers to still go through one of its auction partners, which offer more custom targeting like timing ads to run alongside TV campaigns or during specific weather conditions.
Snapchat's new ads manager will let any advertiser buy, manage, and view reporting for their campaigns. All ad formats,including app install ads, sponsored geofilters, and fullscreen video, are available alongside existing targeting capabilities like goal-based bidding. The manager is free to use and requires no minimum ad spend.
A new mobile dashboard will also allow marketers to see their ads like a normal user, view analytics, and get notification updates about their campaigns directly from the Snapchat app. Over 20 brands are testing these new tools now as part of a private beta, and Snap plans to make them available to everyone in June.
Below is the Snap Inc Q1 2017 Earnings Report Press Release:
Facebook had another strong quarter, beating estimates to start 2017. It scored $8.03 billion in revenue and $1.04 GAAP actual EPS in Q1 compared to $0.87 EPS estimate.It earned that from 1.94 billion users, up from 1.86 billion last quarter, growing at a faster 4.3 percent compared to 3.91 perecent last quarter.
Click Image To Enlarge
Steady Growth, Strong Profits
At this rate Facebook should hit 2 billion total users in Q2. Daily active users reached 1.28 billion, up from 1.23 billion last quarter. While fake news, video violence, and copying Snapchat have all been fixtures of the Facebook news cycle, its user growth actually grew during the time period. Facebook added 3 million monthly users in the lucrative but saturated US & Canada market, though the Asia-Pacific region was the big driver, where Facebook added 43 million users.
The company told investors that “Facebook is no longer reporting non-GAAP expenses, income, tax rate, and earnings per share (EPS).” That means it will be more prominently disclosing stock-based compensation in its expenses, which is important since tech companies like Facebook pay employees lots of stock that vests over time to keep them from leaving.
[Correction: TechCrunch and several other publications wrongly compared the new GAAP actual EPS with the non-GAAP analyst estimate, since Facebook no longer reports non-GAAP financials. Since Facebook’s GAAP actual EPS was $1.04 compared to the analyst estimate of $0.87, Facebook actually beat the street this quarter, rather than having mixed results as we originally reported.]
Facebook beat analyst estimates on revenue, which were $7.83 billion. Facebook had closed the market earlier today down 0.68 percent at $151.80. Shares dropped 2.37 percent in after-hours trading. Today’s report shows that running out of News Feed ad space hasn’t prevented Facebook from continuing to grow its revenue.
Click Image To Enlarge
Mobile now counts for 85 percent of Facebook’s ad revenue, compared to 84 percent last quarter, accounting for $6.7 billion in ad revenue. Facebook earned $3.06 billion in profit in Q1, up 76% year-over-year while revenue grew 49% year-over-year. Facebook managed to slow the decline of its games payments business, with it earning $175 million in Q1 compared to $180 million last quarter and $195 million in Q3. Facebook stopped reporting mobile-only users.
Headcount grew to 18,770 people, up 38 percent YOY. Facebook’s total costs were $4.7 billion, giving it a 41% operating margin, down from 52% margin last quarter.
Facebook’s focus on the developing world with apps like the 200 million-user Facebook Lite, recently rolled-out Messenger Lite, and new Instagram offline mode are paying off. Average revenue per user in the Rest Of World region hit $1.27, up 40% in a year.
Zuckerberg On Leapfrogging Snapchat
During the earnings call, Mark Zuckerberg gave an overview of Facebook’s work on its new mission to “build community” that the CEO described in his humanitarian manifesto in February. Progress includes getting people to join community groups, launching Community Help for organizing disaster and crisis relief, and launching Townhall to connect people to their elected representatives.
One important piece of news from the call was the first indication of the performance of WhatsApp Status, the Facebook-owned messaging app’s Snapchat Stories clone. Zuckerberg said WhatsApp Status now has 175 million daily users just 10 weeks after launch, making it larger than Snapchat as a whole.
“I think we were a little bit late to the trend initially around making cameras the center of how sharing works. But I do think at this point we’re pretty much ahead in terms of the technology that we’re building, and making an open platform I think is a big step forward. A lot of people are using these products across our family of apps. And I would expect us to continue leading the way forward on this from this point on.”
The CEO seems bullish on outside developers helping Facebook to produce a wider ranger of AR content than Snap can itself. When asked about monetizing AR, Zuckerberg brought up how object recognition could enable floating Buy buttons on real world things.
Another significant point from the call was Facebook’s growing emphasis on long-form video and purposeful viewing, rather than the short-form video people spontaneously discover in the feed today. Efforts to thwart ad blockers have also succeeded, with CFO David Wehner saying Facebook served 32% more ad impressions in Q1 2017 versus Q1 2016.
Scandals Don't Slow Facebook
eMarketer estimates that Facebook will generate $36.29 billion in net digital ad revenue in 2017, up 35% from last year. That would give it the second largest share of the global online ad market with 16.2%, behind Google’s 33%. 45% of Facebook ad revenue is expected to come from the US. While Facebook doesn’t break out Instagram financials, eMarketer expects it to earn $3.92 billion in global ad revenue, or 12.3% of Facebook’s ad revenue.
Click Image To Enlarge
eMarketer analyst Debra Aho Williamson is bullish about Facebook as an advertising platform but says.
“Advertisers continue to report positive results from their ads on Facebook, but they remain concerned about things like fake news and the measurement glitches that Facebook has revealed. How the company addresses these and other concerns will be a key factor that determines whether revenue growth continues as strongly in the next few quarters and years as it has in the recent past.”
Q1 saw Facebook spin up several new products that could turn into serious money-makers for the social network. Following the success of Instagram Stories, Facebook continued its efforts to clone Snapchat with the launch of Messenger Day, Facebook Stories, and WhatsApp Status. These clones could dampen growth for Snapchat while eventually sucking in marketing dollars from the ads it will likely insert between Storiesas it does on Instagram.
But Facebook saw trouble with Oculus, paying $300 million (plus $200 million from Oculus founders) to Zenimax after losing a lawsuit about stolen intellectual property. Co-founder Palmer Luckey left the company, and Oculus reduced the price of its Rift headset amidst slow sales of tethered VR hardware across the industry.
The biggest story of the quarter was Facebook’s on-going struggles to fight fake news and offensive content. It’s begun working with outside fact checkers, hired a former New York Times product manager to run news product, made banned content reporting easier, and today announced it will hire 3000 people to speed up vetting of flagged content. Yet even that controversy hasn’t seemed to slow down the social juggernaut.
COMMENTARY: In a blog post dated May 21, 2012, I had predicted that Facebook's IPO had been over-hyped by investers in the pre-IPO secondary market, and that this could result in a further erosion in the share price, and possible share price collapse. This in fact happened, and by August 17, 2012 (see my Blog post), Facebook shares had dropped to new low of $19.87 from their IPO closing price of $38.23. I made jokes about Facebook, calling the social giant "Faceplant." It wasn't until August 23, 2013 that Facebook shares slowly creeped back to exceed their closing IPO price $38.23, by reaching $40.55. A lot of pre-IPO investors waited over nine months to recover their investments. Many investors, like yours truly, bailed out of Facebook and took a loss. I lost over $1,200 myself. I thought at the time that Facebook was one of my worse investments, and I was probably not the only one.
Facebook went into their IPO without a detailed strategy and sustainable business model for generating advertising revenues from mobile users. So the month before the IPO, Facebook acquired Instagram, a mobile photosharing app, for $1 billion. The strategy was to use Instagram as a platform for mobile advertising. However, it wasn't until Q4 2012, that Facebook was able to deliver on its promise to investors, that it could monetize mobile users. In Q4 2012, mobile ad revenues were $305 million or 23% of total ad revenues. The rest is history, of course, as Facebook now dominates all social media sites in mobile ad revenues. For the year ending December 31, 2016, mobile ad revenues constitute 84% of Facebook's $27.6 billion total ad revenues for the year 2016.
If you woul like to read the complete transcript of Facebook's Q4 2016 earnings conference call with investors, you can find it at Seeking Alpha
Courtesy of an article dated May 3, 2017 appearing in Tech Crunch
Google Play widened its lead over iOS in worldwide downloads; however, iOS maintained its lead in worldwide consumer spend.
The first quarter of 2017 saw record levels of worldwide app downloads and consumer spend. iOS and Google Play downloads grew 15% year over year — to nearly 25 billion worldwide. This is an incredible feat since this number only reflects new downloads and is not inclusive of re-installs or cumulative downloads from past quarters.
Gross consumer spend also grew at an impressive 45% year over year in Q1 2017 to well over $15 billion across iOS and Google Play worldwide. This figure only partially represents how publishers can generate money through apps since it does not include revenue from m-commerce or in-app advertising.
The app market is soaring as consumers migrate more of their lives to mobile and pay for the ease, convenience and accessibility that apps offer.
Google Play Downloads Boom in Q1 2017
Google Play widened its lead over iOS to 135% for worldwide downloads in Q1 2017, up from a 100% lead back in Q1 2016. It saw both the greatest absolute growth and the fastest growth rate year over year out of the two stores. Google Play grew 20% year over year, fueled largely by growth in emerging markets like India and Indonesia.
India is still in the early stages of the App Market Maturity Cycle. The incredible rate of downloads the region is currently experiencing is the result of consumers trying out new apps before app habits form. Smartphone penetration in India is below 30%, which paints a rosy picture of long-term growth. As more consumers adopt smartphones, we expect India to continue to contribute significant download growth in the quarters to come.
Click Image To Enlarge
While Android devices dominate in India and drove Google Play downloads in Q1, India was also a chief contributor to growth in iOS downloads, second only to China. China remains a vital market for the iOS App Store, and as downloads continue to grow, consumer spend follows.
Overall, the iOS App Store saw a healthy growth rate of 5% year over year in Q1 2017; however, it’s when looking at consumer spend that the App Store’s leadership really comes into focus.
iOS Consumer Spend Grew 45% YoY in Q1 2017
iOS increased its lead to 100% in consumer spend over Google Play in Q1 2017, up from 90% in Q1 2016. It saw impressive consumer spend growth of 45% year over year in Q1 2017 along with the greatest absolute gains in consumer spend out of the two stores. Given China’s rise to the #1 country by iOS consumer spend, it’s no surprise that China was a chief contributor of growth. China saw both the greatest absolute gains in iOS consumer spend and the largest growth in market share of worldwide iOS consumer spend year over year. Our App Store Forecast predicts that China will remain the largest single market for app store spend through 2021 and is poised to hold its title as the largest single market for iOS consumer spend in the years to come.
Click Image To Enlarge
Google Play Consumer Spend Picked up Speed in Q1 2017
Google Play also saw strong growth — consumer spend grew 40% year over year. While emerging markets fueled much of the download growth, mature markets were the biggest contributors to growth in consumer spend. South Korea and the US saw the greatest growth in market share of worldwide Google Play consumer spend, but Japan and the US saw the largest absolute growth year over year.
While the largest contributors to growth in consumer spend on both Google Play and iOS have come from Asia and the Americas, Europe plays an integral role in driving consumer spend on both stores. The United Kingdom, Germany and France represent three of the top 10 markets for both Google Play and iOS consumer spend in Q1 2017, a trend which has held true for the past five years.
Q1 2017 saw record levels of downloads and consumer spend in the app economy, with particularly strong growth in consumer spend across both stores. With app stores showing undoubtedly healthy growth, one thing is certain: The app economy is nowhere near peaking. Apps are an integral part of consumers lives across the world. Businesses need to adapt to this mobile-first world or be left behind in this booming economy.
COMMENTARY: According to a new App Annie report released on March 29, Apple will lose its lead over Android in terms of revenue generated by mobile apps this year. However, the firm’s estimate is based on including third-party Android app stores in its forecast, not just Google Play. When the Apple App Store is pitted against Google Play alone, Apple is expected to maintain its lead through 2021, the report says.
App Annie is predicting worldwide mobile app downloads to surpass 352 billion in 2021, with gross consumer spend across all the app stores to surpass $139 billion.
Click Image To Enlarge
The iOS App Store will account for a large chunk of that spend, as it’s expected to generate over $60 billion in 2021. Google Play will generate $42 billion, and third-party stores, $36 billion.
Those third-party stores – which include the Android app marketplaces offers by Tencent, Baidu, Xiaomi, Huawei, and others – accounted for $10 billion in revenue last year, and will grow to $20 billion in 2017, the report estimates.
Click Image To Enlarge
The market for Android apps is growing thanks in large part to mobile adoption in China as well as other emerging markets, particularly Mexico, Brazil, and Indonesia.
This will impact app downloads, too. Android downloads from both Google Play and elsewhere will at an annualized rate of 23 percent to 299.9 billion by 2012.
App downloads are more evenly distributed across countries around the world, but revenue is another matter, App Annie also found.
According to its data, the top five countries by downloads – China, India, U.S., Brazil, and Indonesia – accounted for 54 percent of the downloads last year, and this won’t change much through 2021.
Click Image To Enlarge
However, the top countries by revenue – China, U.S., Japan, South Korea, and U.K. – accounted for 75 percent of app store revenue in 2016. This is expected to grow to 85 percent by 2021.
The firm chalked up this shift to increased spending on games and subscriptions from existing smartphone users in mature markets like the U.S., Japan, and South Korea, but especially the maturing market that is China.
China, because of its vast population and growing middle class, still plays a key role when it comes to app store revenues, but its market is maturing, the report notes. The majority of Chinese app users are expected to settle into patterns of habitual use by 2021, which will allow revenue growth to be sustained even though downloads may slow.
Click Image To Enlarge
Downloads in China will grow at an annualized rate of 19 percent from 2016 to 2021, while consumer spend will grow 24 percent to $56.5 billion. In larger cities, much of the smartphone market in China is already saturated, meaning a lot of growth will come from other regions across the country.
India, on the other hand, is still in the early stages of the app market maturity cycle, and will see significant download and revenue growth through 2021. Downloads will grow 28 percent to nearly 23 billion by 2021, and app store spend will grow an annualized rate of 75 percent to $2.1 billion.
Despite India’s growth, consumer spend will be lower in the region because of a variety of factors, including more limited purchasing power and a culture that focuses more on saving versus spending on games and entertainment, App Annie says. It suggests that app developers targeting India consider other revenue models, like advertising.
Courtesy of an article dated April 26, 2017 appearing in App Annieand an article dated March 29, 2017 appearing in Tech Crunch
For the first time, more than half — or 51% — of the record $72.5 billion spent on digital advertising in the U.S. last year was on mobile ads, according to a report conducted by PwC US for the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB).
Click Image To Enlarge
First reported by The Wall Street Journal, those numbers represent a 77% surge of spending on mobile advertising to $36.6 billion last year, according to the IAB. Digital ad spending in general grew 22% in the U.S. from the previous year.
Click Image To Enlarge
David Doty, the IAB’s executive vice president and CMO, told WSJ.
“Brand dollars naturally follow consumers, and you’re starting to see a mobile-first, and sometimes a mobile-only mind-set among marketers.”
A big chunk of that mobile growth was driven by Facebook and Google.
Click Image To Enlarge
Other key findings of the report include growth in online video ads, in which spending jumped 53% to $9.1 billion. Mobile video spending grew by 145% year-over-year to nearly $4.2 billion.
Digital audio advertising crossed the $1 billion spending mark for the first time in 2016. Those figures also include ad revenue generated by streaming services and podcasts.
Click Image To Enlarge
For months, the Association of Magazine Media has tracked online magazine audiences' shift from desktop to mobile devices, in its monthly Magazine Media 360° Brand Audience Reports.
In February, the report found Web audiences using desktops or laptops had dipped by 14.2% compared to the same month a year ago, while mobile audiences were up 2.9%.
Interestingly, the March report from MPA revealed mobile audience decreased by 1.3%, the first report that showed even a slight decline in mobile magazine audience.
An MPA spokesperson said in an email.
“We continue to believe this flattening is due, in large part, to comScore’s methodology change initiated in Jan 2017, as well as an indication this platform is approaching saturation. There are only a handful of magazine brands that have yet to develop their mobile audiences to reportable levels.”
COMMENTARY:
Social Media advertising revenue totaled $16.3 billion for 2016, compared to $10.9 billion in 2015.
For the second half of 2016, Social media revenue was $9.3 billion. Year-over-year, Social media revenue was up 49% from FY 2015. Social continues its half-year growth trends - increases are reflected in the 54% compound annual growth rate of social from 2012 to 2016. Social’s growth continues to play a key role in the growth of Mobile, as Social is a significant activity on Mobile. Note: We define social media as advertising delivered on social platforms, including social networking and social gaming websites and apps, across all device types, including desktop, laptop, smartphone and tablet.
Click Image To Enlarge
The gap between desktop video and Mobile video is quickly closing In FY 16, mobile video revenue was 85% of desktop video revenue.
Total digital video, including mobile and desktop, rose to $9.1 billion in FY 2016, up 53% from $5.9 billion in FY 2015.
Digital video on smartphones and tablets continued strong triple-digit growth, reaching $4.2 billion in FY 2016, an impressive 145% rise from FY 2015.
46% of video ads were displayed on a mobile device in 2016, up from 29% in 2015.
On desktop, digital video was the key growth driver, increasing 16% over FY 2015.
Click Image To Enlarge
Mobile growth is driving demand for digital video advertising.
Mobile now represents just over half of internet advertising, 50.5% in 2016, up from 34.7% in 2015.
When we reallocate mobile activities to traditional formats, we note that digital video grew more than 50% from the previous year.
Display-related formats grew more than 25% 2016, when mobile revenues are included.
Click Image To Enlarge
2016 saw $1.1B in audio advertising revenue
In 2016, revenues from Audio advertising, particularly streaming music services, were significant enough to begin tracking within this report. Below are the FY 2016 revenue figures for desktop and mobile. Beginning in 2017, this category will be tracked for growth on desktop and mobile, with the latter being the clear revenue driver.
Click Image To Enlarge
Industry advertising – Year-over-year comparison
Click Image To Enlarge
Performance-based pricing shows slight downtick while cost per medium/thousand shows slight uptick
Approximately 64% of FY 2016 revenues were priced on a performance basis, down from the 65% reported in FY 2015.
Approximately 35% of FY 2016 revenues were priced on a cost per medium/thousand (CPM) or impression basis, up from the 33% reported in FY 2015.
Approximately 1% of FY 2016 revenues were priced on a hybrid basis, down from the 2% reported in FY 2015.
The SamsungGalaxy S8 is the nicest phone I’ve ever held. It’s a beautiful combination of glass, metal, and an absolutely massive screen in a body that’s much smaller than you might expect.
And that might not be enough to make it stand out anymore.
There are two versions of the S8:
Standard Galaxy S8 with a 5.8-inch screen
S8 Plus with a larger 6.2-inch screen.
Both are available for preorder on March 30th and will be shipping in the US on April 21st. Pricing, as always with Samsung, is up to the carriers — but you can expect them to command a premium price. The early word is that it will start at $720.
Here's the official introduction video uploaded on YouTube on March 29, 2017:
Here’s everything we learned about these two phones after using them for an hour or two last week.
GALAXY S8 HARDWARE
Holding the S8, I’m struck by the fact that nothing about it feels especially surprising, and not just because damn near everything about it has been leaking for the past few months. The boldest feature is every phone’s more important feature: the screen. On the S8, it extends up and down to cover nearly the entire front of the phone. It also curves around the left and right, something Samsung is calling the “infinity display,” which gives it the look of not having any bezels at all. And speaking of curves, the four corners of the screen are also slightly curved instead of squared-off, which adds some elegance and perhaps some screen durability.
Click Image To Enlarge
The S8 and S8 Plus fulfill Samsung’s promise of fitting a big screen in a smaller body, and so they’re quite a bit more usable than other large-screened phones. I didn’t experience some of the accidental touch issues that I still get with the Galaxy S7 Edge. But I also only had about an hour with the phone, so it’s possible that it could still be an issue.
Click Image To Enlarge
More than anything else, the S8 is nice. It may seem like table stakes in 2017, but these phones are incredibly well-designed. There are no seams, only the barest of camera bumps, and everything seems milled down to sub-millimeter tolerances. They feel inevitable in a way that almost becomes boring. Many of the design touches are evolutions of the S7 Edge and Note 7, but refined to their Platonic ideals.
Click Image To Enlarge
Extending the screen to near the bottom of the phone means that there’s no room for Samsung’s traditional hardware home button. Instead, it uses software buttons like other Android phones. It also uses some haptic feedback like Apple’s iPhones to create a virtual feeling of pressing a home button, though it only works on the very specific spot where the software home button appears. One neat feature: some Android apps hide those main Android buttons when they go full screen, but you can still firmly press the bottom of the screen to activate the home button.
Click Image To Enlarge
Getting rid of the physical home button also means that Samsung had to move the fingerprint sensor. It’s on the back now, right next to the camera. That’s not a very convenient place for it, honestly. It’s too high up on the phone to comfortably reach and it’s also right next to the camera module, which might mean you’l be getting fingerprints on the camera more often than you’d like.
Click Image To Enlarge
Speaking of fingerprints, because the S8 is nearly all glass, you’ll see them on the back a lot, but they’re not as prominent as you might expect (they’re worse on the LG G6, for example).
Click Image To Enlarge
Both the USB-C port and the 3.5mm headphone jack (hallelujah) are located on the bottom of the phone. You have power on one side and volume buttons on the other, underneath which you’ll find a whole new button that’s dedicated to the big new software feature on the Galaxy S8, Bixby. There’s much more on Bixby below, but for now I’ll just note that dedicating a hardware button to this software feature is a big bet on Samsung’s intelligent assistant. If Bixby ends up being not that great, I expect many people will be looking for ways to remap that extra hardware button (or decrying that it’s vestigial).
Click Image To Enlarge
GALAXY S8 SPECS
As you’d expect, the S8 has the best specs you can get on an Android phone. Depending on the region, you’ll either get Qualcomm’s newest (and slightly rarer) Snapdragon 835 or Samsung’s own Exynos. In both cases, Samsung is touting that they’re built on a 10nm chip, which should theoretically help with power consumption. In my brief time with it, everything was whip-fast. Hopefully it will stay that way over time — Samsung phones often don’t.
Click To Enlarge Image
The standard S8 has a 570ppi 5.8-inch screen, with a resolution of 2960 x 1440. The S8 Plus has the exact same resolution on its 6.2-inch screen, which works out to 529ppi. For my money, the standard S8 is the way to go. It still feels like a massive screen and the body is significantly smaller. The height of the screen is interesting, too: the aspect ratio is a super-tall 18.5:9, which adds a bunch of screen real estate to scroll through. I didn’t get to test a bunch of third-party apps, so hopefully we won’t see too much weirdness with the new aspect ratio. Even if we do, Galaxy phones are popular enough to prod developers to update their apps to support it.
In terms of other specs, it’s pretty bog standard stuff: 4 gigs of RAM, 64 gigs of onboard storage, and an expandable SD card slot.
GALAXY S8 BATTERY
Nearly 900 words in and I haven’t made an exploding phone joke (you’re welcome, Samsung). But now is the time to point out that the last time the phone maker released a phone this big and beautiful, it literally set itself on fire on a disturbingly regular basis. The company’s responses to this issue were botched and bad for some time before it pivoted, apologized, and introduced a new process for checking battery safety. Those safety checks are important, but Samsung still has to own all the exploding phone jokes and hear them at every mention of its phones for a while.
So on the S8, Samsung did not push the envelope when it comes to capacity. The S8 has a 3,000mAh battery and the S8 Plus has a larger 3,500mAh battery — the same capacity that the Note 7 had. But neither is especially large when you consider the fact that they need to power towering screens. Samsung claims it has tweaked the battery chemistry to help the batteries last longer after a year or two of use.
To make up for it, Samsung is offering the usual suite of power options: Qualcomm Quick Charge and support for both major wireless charging standards. But I still have reservations about how long the batteries will last on these phones. In fact, it may be a reason to seriously consider getting the larger S8 Plus.
GALAXY S8 CAMERAS
Another place where Samsung hasn’t really pushed the envelope is the camera. The S8 uses the exact same rear camera as the Galaxy S7, a 12-megapixel sensor with OIS. Samsung says it’s done work on the software side to improve picture quality, and in my short time with it I found it to be significantly faster than the camera on the Galaxy S7 Edge.
Click Image To Enlarge
It is notable that the S8 Plus doesn’t get a better camera or a dual-camera setup. Excepting screen and battery size, both phones are identical.
I suspect it’s using the “take pictures all the time in the background and just save them when you hit the shutter button” trick we’ve seen on other phones. It also borrows another trick from other Android phones: the shortcut to launch it is double-pressing the power button now (since the home button is virtual).
Click Image To Enlarge
The front-facing camera (aka the one you really care about) has gotten an upgrade. It’s an 8-megapixel sensor now, but more importantly it has autofocus. Switching between cameras was fast and easy, as was swiping over to get to Samsung’s kajillion photo gimmick settings. But some of those gimmicks are pretty neat, I’m especially fond of the GIF mode, though I do wish it was just automatic like you can do with Apple’s Live Photos and the Motion Stills app.
Click Image To Enlarge
In any case, the competition for the “best smartphone camera” is way more interesting now than it was a year ago, when just Samsung and Apple were at the top. Now, Apple and LG are sticking multiple cameras in their phones while Google’s Pixel has jumped to the top of the Android camera quality game. It’s too early to say that Samsung is resting on its photography laurels with the S8, but it is fair to say that there’s probably nothing here that will give other companies reason to worry.
GALAXY S8 SOFTWARE
That Samsung is capable of making great hardware should come as no surprise to anybody. It’s the software where we have reason to be skeptical. Running all the way back to the bad old days of TouchWiz, Samsung has a well-earned reputation for taking Android and mucking it up with bad ideas.
For the past few years, though, the common refrain has been restraint, and I’m going to repeat it again today. Samsung has done a pretty good job keeping its worst instincts in check. There are a ton of weird features to find in the dark recesses of the settings menu, but out of the box the basic look, feel, and functionality of Samsung’s Android skinning is pretty good.
And there are some genuinely great parts, too. The iris scanning that lived all-too-briefly on the Note 7 is back, if you’d like to unlock your phone that way. But the best way to unlock the phone is Samsung’s new face detect system. It takes about 20 seconds to set up and once you do, it works really well. It’s not the same, bad face unlock that was introduced in Android years ago, it’s an entirely new system Samsung made.
In my 10 minutes or so of playing with it, it didn’t fail to unlock a single time. In fact, it was so fast that we a hard time filming it. I had to point the phone away from my face and then just tilt it up to look at myself. I unfortunately forgot to print a glossy 8 x 10 of my face to test with, though, so I can’t say if maybe it’s tuned to be a little too forgiving when it tries to see if it’s you. Samsung admits the face-detect system is less secure than the other ways of unlocking, so you will still need to set up the iris or fingerprint scanners to make payments.
There is one gimmick that in theory I should be excited about but in practice I’m just not: DeX. It’s a feature where, after buying a specialized dock, you can plug your Galaxy S8 into a monitor, keyboard, and mouse and get a full desktop mode. Unlike solutions we’ve seen in the past (RIP Motorola Atrix), the desktop mode here simply offers Android apps instead of a full desktop browser. It looks well-designed for what it is, offering full access to your notifications and resizable windows. But it can’t escape the fact that outside a few apps like Samsung’s own browser, Microsoft Office, and Adobe’s creative suite, Android apps are bad on big screens.
People who unironically call themselves Road Warriors like they’re IT managers in 1999 will love it. The rest of us probably won’t use it. And that’s fine.
GALAXY BIXBY PERSONAL ASSISTANT
Samsung may not have put a ton of effort in changing its hardware design language, updating its camera, or packing in a bigger battery. But it has been focused on figuring out how to make software that people actually like, and it’s all centered on a new virtual assistant called Bixby.
As I mentioned above, Bixby is launched by pressing an honest-to-god dedicated physical button. It has basically three modes:
A short-press of the button takes you to Bixby Home (you can also swipe over to it from the home screen).
Long-pressing the button turns on Bixby’s voice features.
There’s a small button on the camera app for Bixby’s augmented reality features.
Click To Enlarge Image
Let’s start in the middle with voice, because speaking to Bixby is the most interesting and challenging set of features here. Essentially, what Samsung is trying to do is create a new kind of virtual assistant, one that helps you use the device directly in your hands rather than ask random questions from the cloud.
I wasn’t able to test this myself, unfortunately, but Samsung did run us through a couple demos. In one, you can open the gallery app and then issue voice commands for editing a photo rather than trying to dig through the interface to find the right button. “Bixby, rotate this photo left,” and “Bixby, send this photo to Dan.” If you live that Samsung Life, you can use Bixby to send videos to your TV or turn off your smart lights, too.
The goal is that “anything you can control with touch, you can also control with voice.” It’s a laudable goal, but it’s also one I very seriously doubt Samsung can achieve. For one thing, it only works with about 10 Samsung apps at launch. Also, it can only work with apps that are written to support Bixby. Unlike Google Now on Tap, Bixby doesn’t do any screen reading to try and guess what’s on the screen. So it might be a virtual assistant, but it’s very far from an artificial intelligence.
The other big question with Bixby is how exactly is it differentiated from the Google Assistant. It seems pretty clear, but then you discover that there’s a bunch of overlap. For example, you can do things like set alarms with Bixby. There’s also Bixby Home, which so far as I can tell is a giant, random set of information cards for things like your smart light bulbs, fitness data, local news and weather, and whatever else Samsung thinks belongs in a virtual assistant home screen. It looks like every widget screen you’ve ever seen on a phone, which is to say it looks like sort of a mess that you probably won’t use very much.
Last but certainly not least are Bixby’s camera features, which are Bixby’s best features. You can launch it either directly in the camera app or from Bixby Home, and what it essentially does is turn your camera into a photo search machine. Point the Bixby camera app at anything and it will identify it and suggest web searches for it. I tried on flowers and it gave me options to buy flowers on Amazon or look at more flowers on Pinterest. It wasn’t able to precisely identify my Android Wear watch, but it did know it was a round watch and offered to let me buy a real one on Amazon.
It also works with more prosaic things. Samsung ran a demo with wine labels and book covers, both easily identified and given options to buy. Samsung says it’s working with specific partners for Bixby — including Amazon and Pinterest — but it doesn’t appear that it works with the biggest search engine of them all, Google. That’s not really a surprise.
GALAXY S8 RELEASE DATE, COLORS AND PRICE
In the US, the S8 and S8 Plus will come in black, gray, and silver. Gold and blue are options internationally.
The Galaxy S8 and S8 Plus are available for preorder starting tomorrow, March 30th, and you should get a free Oculus headset with a controller and a set of games along with your preorder. The official release in the US is on April 21st. Unfortunately, Samsung won’t confirm pricing, leaving that to its carrier partners — again, it looks like it’ll start at around $720.
COMMENTARY: I was so impressed with the new Samsung Galaxy S8, that I pre-ordered a Galaxy S8 Plus on Thursday, March 30. T-Mobile, my wireless carrier, is running a special promotion, offering a FREE pair of Samsung VR goggles with each new phone ordered, while supply lasts. This is my fourth Samsung Galaxy phone, and I see no reason to change handsets. I hope I made the right choice.
Courtesy of an article dated March 29, 2017 appearing in The Verge and an article dated March 29, 2017 appearing in Android Headlines and an article dated March 29, 2017 appearing in Digital Trends and an article dated March 29, 2017 appearing in Seeking Alpha
Snap, Inc. is reportedly preparing an IPO that will value the company formerly known as Snapchat at around $25 billion.
The social darling is shooting for a March offering, The Wall Street Journal reports, citing sources. A company representative declined to comment on the report, on Thursday.
Standing in stark contrast to struggling social networks like Twitter, Snapchat is presently making more money than it can count.
Click Image To Enlarge
Indeed, despite direct competition from Facebook and other tech giants, the company is positioned for “explosive” growth in ad revenue over the next few years, according to a recent forecast from eMarketer.
Click Image To Enlarge
The research predicts that the playful messaging app will generate $366.69 million in ad revenues this year.
That figure is expected to jump to $935.46 million, next year.
Cathy Boyle, principal analyst at eMarketer, recently said Snapchat’s bright outlook has everything to do with its young user base. Boyl notes in a report.
“Advertisers are attracted to Snapchat for its broad reach among young Millennials and those in Generation Z, which are valuable demographic groups for many businesses.”
Click Image To Enlarge
To its credit, Snapchat has also tailored its ad strategy specifically for this easy-to-alienate demographic.
According to Boyle.
“To engage those often hard-to-reach consumers, Snapchat has expanded its advertising portfolio over the past year to include a wider array of video ads and more sponsored geo-filters and sponsored lenses.”
Click Image To Enlarge
Stateside, Snapchat’s Discover feature generates 43% of ad revenue, which is its largest single share, according to eMarketer.
Next year, however, the research firm expects Stories to overtakes Discover as the dominant ad revenue source -- by generating 37.8% of the company’s domestic ad revenue.
Having launched its ad platform in mid-2015, Snapchat still only captures 2.3% of social-networking dollars, eMarketer estimates. That’s despite the fact that it now commands 36% of the market in terms of domestic users.
Approaching its would-be IPO, Snapchat continues to experiment with new categories.
Bounding into hardware and physical fashion, the company recently unveiledSpectacles -- stylish video-recording sunglasses that are expected to retail for $130.
Click Image To Enlarge
Set to hit shelves later this fall, the shades can record 10-second video snippets, which are designed to approximate one’s natural field of vision. That's thanks to a 115-degree lens, which records circular video. If Spectacles are well received, Snapchat would become the first company to convince consumers to wear connected gadgets on their face.
Click Image To Enlarge
Google notoriously spent millions of dollars in development and marketing dollars, before giving up on its Glass initiative. Yet Snapchat -- which just rebranded itself as Snap, Inc. -- seems to have learned a few things from Google's failure.
Click Image To Enlarge
Spectacles’ $130 price tag is far more reasonable than the $1,500 that Google tried to charge people for Glass. Snapchat’s glasses are also being sold as a single-purpose device, which is historically much easier to market.
like Google, Snapchat currently enjoys a strong bond with young consumers -- the ideal demographic for starting trends and popularizing products.
Although bold, Snapchat’s move into hardware should not come as a complete surprise to industry watchers. The social darling recently joined the industry group that runs the Bluetooth wireless standard, which followed several hires and smallish acquisitions in the arena of consumer electronics.
COMMENTARY: I have to confess that I have not followed or even taken the time to use and evaluate Snapchat because I am most definitely not in their demographics. The idea of posting photos that dematerialize is something that just does not interest me. I ask the question: Why do I need this? I could not bring myself to come to a practical answer. On the other hand, I wasn't in Facebook's demographics either, but now everybody seems to be using the social giant site to connect and engage with users throughout the world.
Now comes the news that Snapchat is coming out with Spectacles, their first foray into cnsumer electronics. Didn't Snapchat's founders realize how intrusive taking someone else's picture without their permission can be? Google found this out when they introduced Google Glass, their augmented reality glasses. The cost for a pair of Google Glass was also prohibitively expensive. Maybe Snapchat will have better luck. Millennials are pretty impulsive, and love trying the latest in consumer electronics devices. They make the lions share of early adopters. The price is just right for Millennials, who are strapped for cash and carry a lot of debt, mostly from student loans. The glasses look "retro cool," but they don't rock my world from a designer standpoint. On the other hand, Spectacles differentiate the company from Instagram and Twitter's Vine and Periscope which also allow users to exchange video content via mobile devices. However, it still comes down to a sustainable business model, and Snapchat only began running ads in mid-2015. In my opinion, this is not a very long time to prove the sustainability of their business model.
The big news of the day is that Snapchat is planning a $25 billion IPO. I smell another Twitter IPO in the making. A startup that just began making money from ads in md-2015 is not reliable proof of a sustainable business model. Snapchat relies exclusively on Millennials, and that market although large, and soon to be the largest demographic segment in the US, is not broad or mainstream like Twitter or Facebook. Another question: How profitable is Snapchat? If they are anything like Twitter at this stage of their development, they are probably not profitable. Both Twitter and LinkedIn (recently acquired by Microsoft) were never profitable, so I would be very cautious about investing in a startup with such a narrow demographic focus.
I am dying to review Snapchat's S-1 filing. It should help answer a lot of investor concerns, and validate my own suspicions and doubts.
Courtesy of an article dated October 6, 2016 appearing in Social Media Marketing Daily, and an article dated June 6, 2016 appearing in AdvertisingAge, and an article dated September 6, 2016 appearing in AdWeek, and an article dated September 24, 2016 appearing in The Verge, and an article dated October 10, 2016 appearing in Profit Confidential
App Annie just released its "2015 Gaming Report" and gaming on mobile devices widened its lead over other platforms in terms of spend, comprising 40% of all consumer spending on games for the year 2015. The reports key findings are summarized below.
Key Themes & Takeaways: Gaming Trends
Mobile gaming overtook both home game consoles and combined PC and Mac gaming in consumer spend for the first time in 2014; the gap widened in 2015 and shows no signs of slowing.
Games continued to have the majority share of worldwide consumer spending on both Google Play and the iOS App Store, with each store seeing incremental year-over-year gains in gaming-related share of consumer spending.
Home game console spending was disproportionately high in North America and Western Europe. Mobile game and PC and Mac game spending was centered in Asia-Pacific and shifted further in that direction in 2015. Asia-Pacific in particular saw explosive growth in share of consumer spending on the iOS App Store.
The top revenue-generating titles on mobile were actually more stable year-over-year than those on handheld game consoles (partly due to handheld games being sold in physical packaging).
Home and handheld game consoles declined marginally in consumer spend from 2013 to 2015.
Home game consoles saw the highest consumer spend per device in 2015 at nearly 5x that of mobile games. However, given their broad appeal, mobile games have a much larger user base and therefore monetize higher overall.
Worldwide Consumer Spending on Games by Device for the Years 2013-2015
Click Image To Enlarge
Mobile gaming overtook both home game consoles and combined PC and Mac gaming for the first time with the highest consumer spend in 2014.
Mobile gaming’s lead continued to widen in 2015 over PC and Mac gaming, home game consoles and handheld game consoles.
Worldwide Consumer Spending Shares on Games, by Region, 2015
Click Image To Enlarge
Asia-Pacific gained in share of game spending for iOS App Store and Google Play combined due to iOS’ explosive growth in China and the healthy growth of all major APAC markets.
Asia-Pacific also gained in share of consumer spending for both handheld games and PC and Mac gaming.
Home consoles didn’t see much growth in Asia-Pacific despite the 14 year ban on consoles in China being lifted in 2015. Western Europe showed growth in home game console spending in 2015.
Top 5 Worldwide Grossing Portable Games, by Platform, 2015
Click Image To Enlarge
Worldwide Game Spending Per Gaming Device, 2015
Click Image To Enlarge
Home game consoles far and away led other gaming mediums in consumer spend per device.
Mobile gaming saw the smallest consumer spending per device, but had the largest gaming base, reaching not only core gamers but also a significant amount of casual gamers who may not otherwise play games.
Key Themes & Takeaways: US Gamers
There was practically an even gender split within both the mobile gaming (Android Phone and iPhone gamers) and PC and Mac gaming communities in the US in 3Q 2015. Related games represent a great opportunity for marketers to reach both male and female customers.
In 3Q 2015, PC and Mac gamers skewed toward those aged 45+, handheld and console gamers skewed towards those aged 13–24, and mobile was more evenly distributed with the largest age bracket being 25–44.
Android phones trailed significantly behind the other gaming platforms in typical hours of gameplay per week. (Such gamers spent less than one-third the time of those on home game consoles, handheld consoles and combined PC and Mac.)
Appealing to a broader user base, which includes non-traditional and casual gamers, US Android Phone gamers played less time per person per week. Gamers on other devices had much higher weekly gameplay hours per person.
US Gaming Device Demographics, by Gender, 3Q 2015
Click Image To Enlarge
Males and females were represented evenly among US iPhone and Android Phone gamers and combined PC and Mac gamers.
US home console gamers skewed male (approximately 59%) in 3Q 2015.
Handheld game consoles in the US skewed the strongest female (approximately 53%) in 3Q 2015.
US Gaming Device Demographics, by Age, 3Q 2015
Click Image To Enlarge
PC and Mac gaming skewed older than other US gaming devices in 3Q15 with about 59% aged 45+.
Handheld game consoles had the largest share of young American gamers at 36%+ under 24 years old in 3Q 2015.
US mobile gamers were strongest in the 25–44-year-old bracket at about 40%.
US Gaming Device Demographics, by Hours of Gameplay Per Person, 3Q 2015
Click Image To Enlarge
US Android Phone gamers played less than 3 hours per week on average in 3Q 2015. (This mobile gaming community is larger and includes a significantly higher share of casual gamers.)
41% of PC and Mac gamers played less than 5 hours per week versus 22% on consoles.
14% of PC and Mac gamers played greater than 20 hours per week versus 8% on consoles.
Key Themes & Takeaways: Wrap-Up
Mobile gaming surpassed both home game console and PC and Mac gaming to become the top global platform by consumer spending in 2014, furthering this lead over other gaming devices in 2015. Mobile gaming grew to over 40% of total consumer spend on games last year, up from about 35% in 2014.
More than 80% of combined iOS and Google Play consumer app spending in 2015 was derived from games, which enjoyed significant spending growth. On iOS, this share topped 75% in the second half of 2015.
The Asia-Pacific region saw the greatest growth in share of game consumer spending worldwide on iOS and Google Play app stores, handheld gaming, and combined PC and Mac gaming, a testament to the cultural gaming tradition of many countries in the region as well as the ongoing expansion of China as an increasingly large and viable market for game monetization.
Home console gaming saw more than double the consumer spend per device than any other gaming platform. Mobile gaming saw the lowest consumer spend per device, but had the largest audience, giving it the highest overall consumer spend in 2015.
In the US, there is a significant opportunity across all platforms to attract male and female gamers. Console gamers skewed decidedly male. Android Phone and iPhone along with PC and Mac gaming represented near-even gender divides for gamers.
Across handheld, PC and Mac and home console games, users spend roughly the same amount of time per week playing games on average.
PC and Mac gamers have much more variance in the amount of typical gameplay per week compared to home console gamers, with almost double the size of the user base at both extremes (less than 5 hours per week and greater than 20 hours per week).
Hours of gameplay per user per week on Android phones was significantly lower than other gaming platforms, a result of the wide appeal and broadened user base from casual gamers.
Courtesy of an article dated March 29, 2016 appearing in App Annie Blog
There's currently no better way to get started with virtual reality.
When Samsung and Oculus debuted their Gear VR headset almost a year ago, the companies made it clear the device wasn't yet ready for the masses. Billed as "Innovator Edition" models, the original Gear VRs were intended mainly for early adopters. They only fitted a limited number of phones -- the original was designed just for the Note 4; the second for the Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge -- and were also quite pricey at $200 per headset.
Beginning November 10, 2015, Samsung began taking pre-orders of their new Samsung Gear VR headset through Amazon.com, BestBuy.com, and Samsung.com. On November 20, 2015, Samsung and Oculus released the first-ever consumer-ready version of the Gear VR for shipment. The new Samsung Gear VR headset is smaller, lighter, cheaper (only $99) and is compatible with more phones (the Note 5, S6, S6 Edge and S6 Edge+). But, more importantly, its content library has exploded, with more VR apps and games than ever before. Virtual reality has finally gone mainstream, and there's no better way to get started than with the new Gear VR.
Click Image To Enlarge
Summary
Samsung's Gear VR is the company's first virtual reality headset designed for everyday consumers. For just $99 and a compatible Samsung phone, you can dive into an incredible experience that'll have you watching 360-degree movies and playing super immersive games. Yes, it only works with a limited number of phones, but right now, there's no better option if you want to give VR a try.
Hardware
Samsung never made any pretensions that the Gear VR would be small and portable -- it's always been a rather large headset that looks like you have a giant pair of ski goggles strapped on your face. But every iteration of the Gear VR has been more lightweight than the last, and the new consumer-ready version is no exception. Samsung says it's about 19 percent lighter, and I definitely feel it. The previous models had chunky white plastic around the head straps while the current model has none. This not only reduces the headset's overall weight, but makes it far less cumbersome to put on. All you do is strap the headset to your head with a couple of elasticized Velcro straps -- one around the back of your head and the other around the top -- and you're ready to go. The top strap is technically optional, but I liked having it on for a more secure fit.
The fit, by the way, is pretty excellent. The soft foam padding around the eyes and the nose bridge makes the fit very comfortable (My discomfort came from nausea instead; more on that later). Another upside is that new Gear VR also easily accommodates most glasses -- I was able to wear mine without too much shifting around. That said, if you have a relatively lightweight prescription, you might want to go without your glasses entirely for additional comfort. Plus, the Gear VR has a focus wheel at the top so you can easily adjust the focus to match your eyesight.
Like all the previous Gear VRs, the new model is not a standalone headset -- it's essentially a VR viewer for your phone; sort of a fancier version of Google's Cardboard, if you will. Except that unlike Cardboard, the Gear VR has additional hardware -- an accelerometer, a gyroscope and proximity-based sensors -- on board to reduce latency and increase the performance overall.
Click Image To Enlarge
To get started, you'll have to snap the phone onto the front of the Gear VR so that the display faces the headset's stereoscopic lenses. Simply dock the phone into a micro-USB dock on the left and then lock it in place with a plastic holder on the right. At least for now, the Gear VR is compatible with four different Samsung phones: the Galaxy S6, the S6 Edge, the S6 Edge+ and the Note 5. Since the latter two phones are slightly larger than the others, the Gear VR has a toggle that you can use to slide the micro-USB dock to the left or right to accommodate the different sizes. Though it seems like the headset's use is limited to just these four phones, Samsung told us that it's highly likely the current Gear VR could be compatible with future Samsung phones too.
By default, controls are relegated to the four-way directional touchpad on your right temple. It's much more contoured than previous Gear VR models plus there's a raised center nub, which makes the whole thing far easier to use -- you can just feel your way around to figure out the controls. Above the touchpad is a back button, which has been relocated slightly to the right for easier accessibility, while a volume rocker is located to the front.
Though it's not included with the Gear VR, I also recommend you wear a pair of headphones with it, as it'll make your VR experience more immersive. There are also a few games that would benefit from the use of a dedicated gamepad controller (again, this isn't included with the headset), which you can connect to the phone via Bluetooth.
Hand-On Test
I tested the Gear VR with a Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge+. Setup was pretty easy; once you have the phone loaded into the headset, you're pretty much ready to go. As soon as it docks into place, the handset will automatically launch Oculus Home, a VR content portal from where you can launch a variety of apps, movies or games (if you don't have the Oculus app installed, it'll prompt you to do so). Virtual reality content has exploded in the past year, and nowhere is this more evident than the variety available on the Oculus Store -- Samsung and Oculus tells us there are already more than a 100 apps and games on board, with even more coming down the pipeline.
Before we delve into the content, let's talk about the display quality. In short, it's not great. Since you're essentially pressing the phone's screen up to your face, there's definitely a slight "screen door effect" where you can spot individual pixels. This effect seems a lot more reduced than previous Gear VR headsets, but it was still noticeable. As a result, videos looked pretty pixilated and games just didn't look as sharp as I would like. Of course, a lot of this is dependent on the phone's display -- the S6 Edge+ has a very good 1440 x 2560 Quad HD resolution, but even that didn't prove sharp enough when magnified with the Gear VR's lenses. I'll admit to brushing aside the need for phones with 4K displays, but perhaps there's a real benefit if you plan to use them with VR headsets.
That said, once I started really playing around with the content, I found myself casting those display quibbles aside. Viewing 360-degree video of an ocean landscape was wonderfully serene and peaceful, and I also enjoyed watching episodes of Doctor Who on Netflix as if I were in movie theater. Playing games was especially delightful: Shooting at incoming drones in EVE:Gunjack and flying around on a jetpack in Omega Agent was fun and engaging. Being able to look around you to home in on enemy targets feels a lot more interactive than just waggling a thumbstick.
Click Image To Enlarge
My favorite game by far, however, is Land's End, a puzzle game akin toMyst or Monument Valley. Set on a rocky island, you solve puzzles by staring at dots to illuminate them, tracing a line from dot to dot in order to unlock a path. The immersive VR environment coupled with the game's tranquil soundtrack makes this one of the more meditative games I've ever come across. Note: I recommend using a swivel chair to play some of these games so that you don't suffer from too much neck strain.
As much as I was having fun however, I found that I could not wear the Gear VR for very long periods of time. That's because it does make me feel a bit nauseous; I had to take the headset off every half hour or so to stop my head from spinning. Of course, your mileage may vary here, but it's worth the warning. I happen to be one of those people who suffers from motion sickness on boats and while traveling down windy roads, so I'm perhaps more susceptible to this kind of thing.
Another thing to watch out for is battery life. After a solid hour of VR time, the phone's battery dropped by as much as 20 percent. After four or five hours, the phone was nearly dead. Also beware if you do want to keep the phone in VR mode for very long, as it does occasionally get hot enough to overheat.
The Competition
If you just wanted to get your feet wet with virtual reality, Google's Cardboard is not a bad start. After all, it costs close to nothing and it's dead easy to set up. The downsides, of course, is that it doesn't offer nearly the same degree of sophistication and immersion that the Gear VR does. The Gear VR has straps so you can wear it for hours on end, additional on-board sensors to reduce latency, plus it has a dedicated touchpad for greater control. At the end of the day, Google Cardboard is just, well, cardboard, while Samsung's Gear VR is a full-fledged dive into virtual reality.
The Google Cardboard VR headset is available through Amazon for under $20.00 (Click Image To Enlarge)
Then again, Gear VR's performance doesn't quite compare to more advanced VR headsets like the Oculus Rift, the PlayStation VR and the HTC Vive. For one thing, Samsung's Gear VR doesn't have positional head tracking, so you can't do things like duck behind walls or bend your head down to take a closer look at something on the ground. The other headsets also promise to be far more powerful -- the Rift and the Vive will be powered by high-end gaming rigs while the Playstation VR will harness the computational prowess of the PS4. That should lead to a higher fidelity experience with better graphics and better physics -- features that even the best smartphone won't be able to match.
Oculus Rift VR headset is designed for professional VR developers. The headset and Oculus' software developers kit (SDK) is available on Amazon for $1,275.00 (Click Image To Enlarge)
Yet, those other systems aren't even available to the public yet. Plus, they promise to be much more expensive. Though the prices aren't official just yet, rumor is that they'll cost at least $300 each. And that doesn't even include the cost of a high-end gaming PC, which could be well over $1,000. If you plan on going with the Playstation VR, a PS4 isn't cheap either, retailing at around $350. Even if you were to buy a Gear VR along with a compatible Samsung phone, that would only run around $500 to $700 if you get your phone off-contract. Additionally, all three rival headsets need to be tethered to their source computer, which limits your movements when playing games. The $99 Gear VR, on the other hand, is completely mobile, letting you swivel around on your chair or take it anywhere.
Sony's Project Morpheus is now called PlayStation VR and has a vague release date of Q1 2016, but Sony has not announced a price (Click Image To Enlarge)
The HTC Vive VR headset was designed for professional VR developers and will be available for pre-ordering in February 2016 with shipments in April 2016. No prices have been announced (Click Image To Enlarge)
Closing Statements
If Google Cardboard gives a taste of virtual reality, Samsung's Gear VR offers up a whole feast. With just the addition of a smartphone, you can get a truly immersive VR headset that lets you travel distant lands, watch movies and shoot up spaceships in alien worlds. It's comfortable to wear for hours at a time -- even if you wear glasses -- and controls are intuitive and easy to understand. Yes, it's only compatible with Samsung's latest handsets and no, it's not quite as advanced as headsets like the Oculus Rift. But at only $99, Samsung's Gear VR still makes for a great entry-level VR headset for the everyday consumer. If you already have a compatible Samsung phone, it's a no-brainer.
COMMENTARY: If you haven't already done so, I urge you to read my blog post of September 24, 2015, when Facebook and Samsung announced the Samsung Gear VR headset at the Oculus Connect 2 Developers Conference.
With Gear VR, Samsung gets to be the first to push VR hardware out to the mainstream and it serves as a lure to bring brand-new Galaxy owners in. The company is putting itself at the tip of a sector that; according to SuperData's Stephanie Llamas, will drive the bulk of VR sales at first.
The mobile slice of the VR sector is forecasted to generate nearly $1 billion in revenues by the end of 2016 and fatten to about $4.4 billion by the close of 2019, according to SuperData Researcher's preliminary study into the nascent market.
The big lure for early adopters is the very affordable price of $99.00. This pricing strategy appears to have worked with both BestBuy and Amazon reporting that they are out-of-stock, but are taking back orders for delivery at a future date. If you already own a Samsung Galaxy S6, S6 Edge, S6 Edge+ or Note 5 you are good to go, but first you must download the Oculus VR software. Once installed, you will be able to run over 100+ (and growing) VR apps designed for the headset.
I haven't tried the Samsung Gear VR headset yet, but Amazon claims the headset is a No 1 best seller and owners have given it an average review rating of 4.5 stars. 65% of owners have given it a 5 star rating. The biggest complaint from Amazon owners has been the video quality which depends on the resolution of your Samsung phone. Owners are also reporting that the headset is a huge drain on your phone's battery, can cause your phone to overheat, and you may experience eye fatigue if you use the headset several hours. All users loved the low price and highly emersive VR experience.
Some Altenatives
If you are still hesitant to dive in and buy the Samsung Gear VR headset, there are several lower-priced alternatives (yes, there are) you may wish to consider. All of these fall into the "starter" category and are a great way to experience virtual reality on the cheap.
Google Cardboard VR is a starter headset made of cardboard that sells for $12.98 on Amazon. Owners called the Google Cardboard VR headset "simple, fun and affordable." To use the headset you need to download the free Cardboard app from Google Play. According to Google Play, the Cardboard app has been reviewed by nearly 69,000 owners and has received an average user review of 4.2 stars (out of 5). The Google Cardboard VR headset will accommodate phones with displays up to 6-inches in size and running Android OS 4.1 or higher. Google Play claims between 1-5 million Cardboard app downloads. Amazon says they are temporarily out-of-stock, but the site says they will have more on December 19, 2015. Hypergrid Business published a list of 22 online sites where you can buy Google Cardboard VR. Google Cardboard is also available through Walmart and BestBuy, but you will pay a bit more. The Google Cardboard VR head garnered a review of 4 stars on Google Play. 74% of owners gave it 5 stars.
View-Master VR Starter Pack - Is compatible with and uses the Google Cardboard app (see above). The Starter Pack includes one View-Master viewer, one Preview Reel, one adapter for the iPhone 5, iPhone 5c and iPhone 5s and a user guide. The Preview Reel included with the Starter Pack allows you to sample View-Master VR apps, such as Space, Destinations and National Geographic: Wildlife. You can fully explore these exotic new worlds by purchasing View-Master VR Experience Packs (sold separately). Reviews averaged 4 stars from Amazon users. Available at Amazon, Target, Toys R US, Barnes & Noble and Walmart. $24.99 to $29.99.
FIVESUNG 3D VR headset - This is a knock-off of the Google Cardboard VR viewer, but made of plastic. Reviews are all over the place. Reviews averaged 3 stars from Amazon users. Available at Amazon and owner reviews were mixed averaging 3.8 stars (out of 5). Price: $19.99.
Courtesy of an article dated November 15, 2015 appearing in Engadget, an article dated November 20, 2015 appearing in CNN Money, an article dated October 28, 2015 appearing in Wearable, an article dated December 12, 2015 appearing in Tech Times, an article dated November 23, 2015 appearing in Tech Times, and an article dated August 10, 2014 appearing in Hypergrid Business
LinkedIn: 
Recent Comments