A trend is starting to emerge and it's one worth watching, as it speaks directly to demand creation. It is interesting as it reflects a paradox, in how we assume behaviours across markets. Specifically, this rears up in the mobile marketplace, but the trend is worth considering in other ways too.
The foundational piece of information that matters in this case is that the iOS platforms (Apple devices) and the Android platforms (Google's OS powering lots of hardware) are no longer even as we look at use in the US. Android has approximately 62M phone devices and Apple's phones are used by about 40M people. These figures are from Comscore and are good estimates. So, you'd think that all things being equal, the traffic generated from Android based operating system devices should be 1.5x that of what we see coming from Apple. You'd think.
What we saw on Black Friday and tracked courtesy of IBM, was that the demand created on mobile platforms increased this year over last. This "channel" of online sales increased to 24% of total demand. Impressive, but frankly explainable by greater mobile platform proliferation across society. All the millions of devices we hear about being sold on various launch weekends have to be used somewhere.
If we dive into the figures on just mobile shopping, a bizarre trend starts to appear. Of the demand created, you'd think from device deployment, that the Android universe ought to be responsible for 60% of the mobile shopping, but in fact it's only 21%. The Apple world is responsible for 77% of the demand. And while both platforms grew in their share of online shopping this year (over last), Android grew at a factor of 3.4 and Apple's iOS devices grew at a 4.8 factor. So the paradox isn't getting smaller, it's actually growing. Let me say this another way - Apple's engagement on their devices is 3-4X that of Android engagement, and seems to be increasing.
The paradox here if I spell it out is that the devices themselves do similar things, and are aimed at roughly the same segment in society, so we should be seeing equal traction. Historically, iOS devices have always used up more bandwidth (mobile & wifi) than Android did, but that was partially explained away by Apple having a deeper App library. It appears however there was something else going here all along.
It seems at face value that the user is either not as engaged to shop/create demand on an Android device; or the user profile of those purchasing Android based devices is fundamentally different than was previously thought. For what it's worth, this does apply to more than just phones, iPad was the device that 'owned' Black Friday according to IBM. It alone was 10% of all online shopping, more than any single other device, and had 88.3% of the tablet traffic. Android's "as-good-as-an-iPad" device the Samsung Galaxy was the top Android device at 1.8% of tablet traffic. This is one of the reasons I'm referring to the OS - operating system, rather than device platform, as the trend we're seeing is OS dependent.
There's lots of other wonderful little nuggets in the IBM report, such as the lack of impact of Facebook and Twitter. Enjoy the read.
What does this all mean ? A few things I think. It means an assumption was made, that wasn't true. It means we're all individuals in how we elect to engage, and it means that our world is becoming more transparent that we can know this almost as soon as it happens.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Monday, November 26, 2012
Big Data ? Not yet
A current buzz-phrase, "big data" refers to the capture of all we each do online. It's supposed to enable a revolution in the way business interacts with us, as it captures how we act, what we look at, like, share and search for. It is the foundation upon which a whole new industry is springing up, many of them telling us it's already dawned.
Now I've been careful with 'tense' here. It's supposed to is what I said, and it isn't there yet. Want proof ? Look in your email today on various cyber-monday deals. (soon Hallmark with have us buying one another cyber monday greeting cards I'm sure). They sort of align to what we're interested in, but not really. Big assumptions, bad misses and lots of junk still. Cyber Monday is the litmus test of big data's arrival.
Today we see the unfulfilled promise of big data, as the refinement of the algorithms, the crunching of yet more data and the general intelligence in analysis isn't quite there yet. But it is coming. Just not today.
Now I've been careful with 'tense' here. It's supposed to is what I said, and it isn't there yet. Want proof ? Look in your email today on various cyber-monday deals. (soon Hallmark with have us buying one another cyber monday greeting cards I'm sure). They sort of align to what we're interested in, but not really. Big assumptions, bad misses and lots of junk still. Cyber Monday is the litmus test of big data's arrival.
Today we see the unfulfilled promise of big data, as the refinement of the algorithms, the crunching of yet more data and the general intelligence in analysis isn't quite there yet. But it is coming. Just not today.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Smart
I had a small ah-ha moment today, clarifying something that I've wondered about for some time. A person that I'd accredited with significant knowledge had been out-foxed in the recent past. And I'd wondered why and how. It's not a thing one can ask directly about either - "Tell me how you were so blinded to this obvious situation please.."
Today I learned why and therefore how, and it was telling. Not so much about them and their situation, but rather about me.
I'd forgotten that I shouldn't associate something that I know to be true with someone else, simply because I respect them and believe them to be quite bright. I'd forgotten that we are each a product of our experience and that's what makes us individuals. "Smart" isn't a uniform standard, rather it's an ability to deal critically and with wisdom upon that which we have experience, combined with an ability to bring to any situation an understanding and curiosity about what we don't know. In my own desire to see how smart-ness had failed the person, I wasn't very smart myself.
I do love getting bitten by irony.
Today I learned why and therefore how, and it was telling. Not so much about them and their situation, but rather about me.
I'd forgotten that I shouldn't associate something that I know to be true with someone else, simply because I respect them and believe them to be quite bright. I'd forgotten that we are each a product of our experience and that's what makes us individuals. "Smart" isn't a uniform standard, rather it's an ability to deal critically and with wisdom upon that which we have experience, combined with an ability to bring to any situation an understanding and curiosity about what we don't know. In my own desire to see how smart-ness had failed the person, I wasn't very smart myself.
I do love getting bitten by irony.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Simplify
This ought to be one of our ten commandments of life.
Usability is perhaps the least acknowledged and yet most valuable concept we're aware of. Usable excellence happens when we aim for simplicity and achieve it. You can apply this to almost any area of our lives - from processes to products, services to science.
Allow me to illustrate with my vote for best technology, the one that places simplicity at the forefront of its purpose. The light switch. Very few people acknowledge this, and yet this little omnipresent tech is everywhere. It actually does something quite magical that we take for granted. You see, all the weird and little-understood bits are behind the scene, and if you disagree with that, don't call the electrician the next time it doesn't work, try fixing it yourself. I recommend not standing in water at the time.
Simplicity succeeds all around us as well. I recently heard someone talking about the "miracle" of very young children using various iPad and tablet interfaces, with the cutting observation that if our expectations are exceeded because kids can mange a 1-button, touch interface, then perhaps we need higher expectations. That 1-button approach by the way, is the key to Apple design success.
In the next couple days notice the things and procedures around you. Look for the over-engineered, over-optioned and well intentioned but badly designed things in your life. Ask yourself how you might simplify these, and then take that thought-process into whatever you do. It'll make the world a better place. Guaranteed.
Usability is perhaps the least acknowledged and yet most valuable concept we're aware of. Usable excellence happens when we aim for simplicity and achieve it. You can apply this to almost any area of our lives - from processes to products, services to science.
Allow me to illustrate with my vote for best technology, the one that places simplicity at the forefront of its purpose. The light switch. Very few people acknowledge this, and yet this little omnipresent tech is everywhere. It actually does something quite magical that we take for granted. You see, all the weird and little-understood bits are behind the scene, and if you disagree with that, don't call the electrician the next time it doesn't work, try fixing it yourself. I recommend not standing in water at the time.
Simplicity succeeds all around us as well. I recently heard someone talking about the "miracle" of very young children using various iPad and tablet interfaces, with the cutting observation that if our expectations are exceeded because kids can mange a 1-button, touch interface, then perhaps we need higher expectations. That 1-button approach by the way, is the key to Apple design success.
In the next couple days notice the things and procedures around you. Look for the over-engineered, over-optioned and well intentioned but badly designed things in your life. Ask yourself how you might simplify these, and then take that thought-process into whatever you do. It'll make the world a better place. Guaranteed.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Brazil
I was there for the first time last week, and was asked today why I hadn't written about it. After-all, it's a significant place by any account, and one that's supposed to inspire us with it's effervescent culture, a growing economy and allegedly some fantastic beaches.
Sure, it was nice, but it didn't impress me. Perhaps as I was in Sao Paulo. Not the prettiest, and not the cultural centre. No beaches, parades or Carnivale in sight. It's the business capital and yes it was very busy, with incredible traffic and people swarming in every direction. 20-27M people by public accounts. That's big for a city if that's not obvious to you. The image at left is Sao Paulo as seen from the ISS, and you can see it's clearly not the most eco-friendly city in the world either.
It had that very large developing-place grey-ness to it. The air was grey with the exhaust from countless millions of cars, the buildings were grey as that was efficient, and the people were too. By that I mean they were serious. This was the place to make money, not fun.
It's interesting to compare/contrast another BRIC country I just spent some time in - China. In Shanghai, it's about showiness, everything glittered, glowed or screamed for attention. I imagine Rio de Janeiro might be like that in Brazil, but at this point, I'll only be able to imagine it.
The truth is travelling the globe sometimes take you to places that aren't memorable, and that means we don't talk about them, write about them, or share our photos of them (I didn't actually take a single picture). But this last point - that it isn't all wonderful - it is worth highlighting here.
Sometimes for something to stand out, there has to be another thing or place it stands out from.
(As a P.S. I am back in Brazil in a couple weeks, and will arrive with an open mind to try to see the colours)
Sure, it was nice, but it didn't impress me. Perhaps as I was in Sao Paulo. Not the prettiest, and not the cultural centre. No beaches, parades or Carnivale in sight. It's the business capital and yes it was very busy, with incredible traffic and people swarming in every direction. 20-27M people by public accounts. That's big for a city if that's not obvious to you. The image at left is Sao Paulo as seen from the ISS, and you can see it's clearly not the most eco-friendly city in the world either.It had that very large developing-place grey-ness to it. The air was grey with the exhaust from countless millions of cars, the buildings were grey as that was efficient, and the people were too. By that I mean they were serious. This was the place to make money, not fun.
It's interesting to compare/contrast another BRIC country I just spent some time in - China. In Shanghai, it's about showiness, everything glittered, glowed or screamed for attention. I imagine Rio de Janeiro might be like that in Brazil, but at this point, I'll only be able to imagine it.
The truth is travelling the globe sometimes take you to places that aren't memorable, and that means we don't talk about them, write about them, or share our photos of them (I didn't actually take a single picture). But this last point - that it isn't all wonderful - it is worth highlighting here.
Sometimes for something to stand out, there has to be another thing or place it stands out from.
(As a P.S. I am back in Brazil in a couple weeks, and will arrive with an open mind to try to see the colours)
Friday, November 2, 2012
When you can See the Ceiling
Is it easy to touch the ceiling ? Perhaps if you're almost tall enough, it's something you like to do. What about when you're outside, ever try it there ? I'll bet you don't. It would be pointless, as the ceiling outside is infinite, right ?
Companies and even industries go through the same approach to their markets. When they know they are in a small marketplace, the objective often becomes about marketshare. They keenly focus their competitive eye on getting more than the next company. But when they are in a green-field situation, they are just looking to do a good job and get noticed. Cirque du Soleil is a company in the latter situation, and they aren't fighting for market-share anywhere - mind-share perhaps to get noticed vs other forms of entertainment - as they place more and more of their shows ever closer together.
Two weeks ago, the Economist referenced a study done by a mobile/cell phone industry body - GSM. It spoke to the addressable market size of all phones globally. There are 5.9B devices out there with an active mobile chip, and 46% or 3.2B people of Earth's 7B total population have one (some have more than one clearly). They calculated that the addressable market size (the ceiling) was 4.7B people as the very young, elderly, sick etc aren't real potential customers. That means the mobile phone industry can now race to equip another 1.5B people, and can only hope for an upside of 2.775 B more devices at the current deployment rate of 1.85 devices per user. Sounds huge right ? I bet it doesn't if you're Samsung, Apple, Rim, Microsoft, Nokia or any of the host of other organizations trying to get a piece. It sounds like a race to the finish now.
Knowing all this, my question for you is two-fold. Do you know your industries' addressable market size, and if you did, would you act differently ?
Companies and even industries go through the same approach to their markets. When they know they are in a small marketplace, the objective often becomes about marketshare. They keenly focus their competitive eye on getting more than the next company. But when they are in a green-field situation, they are just looking to do a good job and get noticed. Cirque du Soleil is a company in the latter situation, and they aren't fighting for market-share anywhere - mind-share perhaps to get noticed vs other forms of entertainment - as they place more and more of their shows ever closer together.
Two weeks ago, the Economist referenced a study done by a mobile/cell phone industry body - GSM. It spoke to the addressable market size of all phones globally. There are 5.9B devices out there with an active mobile chip, and 46% or 3.2B people of Earth's 7B total population have one (some have more than one clearly). They calculated that the addressable market size (the ceiling) was 4.7B people as the very young, elderly, sick etc aren't real potential customers. That means the mobile phone industry can now race to equip another 1.5B people, and can only hope for an upside of 2.775 B more devices at the current deployment rate of 1.85 devices per user. Sounds huge right ? I bet it doesn't if you're Samsung, Apple, Rim, Microsoft, Nokia or any of the host of other organizations trying to get a piece. It sounds like a race to the finish now.
Knowing all this, my question for you is two-fold. Do you know your industries' addressable market size, and if you did, would you act differently ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
