Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts

Sunday, February 03, 2008

The New Internets: Is Microsoft Already Ahead of Google? Who Needs Yahoo!?

Google has a clear lead over Microsoft when it comes to desktop based internet search and advertising. The big pond that Google is going after to expand its market is to aim for a bigger share of the advertising pie that includes print, radio and even television advertising.

Meanwhile, Microsoft is trying to catch up with Google in search and advertising. But that is not where they can out maneuver and beat Google. This may be the reason Microsoft is targeting ubiquitous computing - the new internets that are yet to be dominated.

My Car's Internet
Americans spend a significant amount of their lives in cars commuting and picking up kids from school. Microsoft, working with Ford, is far ahead in the connected-car game. Think of it as the Microsoft Operating System for Cars.

Source: msmobiles.com

The addition of Yahoo! to the basket of technologies and services Microsoft can offer, especially Yahoo! Go, can help Microsoft further gain leadership here. Yahoo! Maps activated by voice integrated with your car's GPS. The possibilities are endless.

My TV's Internet
After the car, we spend a significant portion of our lives vegetating in front of televisions. And even though the amount of time we spend on TV vs computers is declining - it is still significant.
Microsoft IPTV initiative, now re-branded as Microsoft Mediaroom, is a leader in this space. And Microsoft has done a tremendous job of building alliances around this. Taking a page from its Windows play book where the Dell, HP and IBM's of the world helped it become the leader, Microsoft is tieing up with partners be it global telcos like BT or regional leaders like Reliance in India.

My Game Box's Internet
So, we all know that after the initial hiccups and skepticism, XBox strategy is finally ready to pay dividends (Microsoft is expected to finally make a profit on XBox this year) - but even without the profits, it is hard to deny that XBox has captured a significant market share. Yahoo! has done well with its casual games and is a leader in the space. It would be interesting to see what synergies can be brought to bear through this alliance.

Searching for Success
So, yes search and advertising is a huge market. And Google could become the first trillion dollar market cap company according to some. By the way, where is Henry Blodget now that the Google stock growth has, how shall we say it, slowed down. I guess Henry Blodget timed it perfectly again - pretty much making the most bullish claim at the height of Google valuation - that should have been a signal to the rest of us (see my and Barron's post on the Blodget call).

Henry Blodget Timed It Again Perfectly In October
Image Source: Yahoo! Finance

Coming back to search and advertising - even if Google continues to win and maintain marketshare in search and advertising, Microsoft can win big by focusing on the new internets.

Theoretical Framework: Blue Ocean?
Although there may not be any method to this madness (the $45 billion bid), I am drawn to the blue and red ocean analogy put forward in the book, Blue Ocean Strategy. Here is a summary from Wikipedia.

Blue Ocean Strategy

The metaphor of red and blue oceans describes the market universe. Red oceans are all the industries in existence today—the known market space. In the red oceans, industry boundaries are defined and accepted, and the competitive rules of the game are known. Here companies try to outperform their rivals to grab a greater share of product or service demand. As the market space gets crowded, prospects for profits and growth are reduced. Products become commodities or niche, and cutthroat competition turns the red ocean bloody. Hence, the term red oceans.[3]

Blue oceans, in contrast, denote all the industries not in existence today—the unknown market space, untainted by competition. In blue oceans, demand is created rather than fought over. There is ample opportunity for growth that is both profitable and rapid. In blue oceans, competition is irrelevant because the rules of the game are waiting to be set. Blue ocean is an analogy to describe the wider, deeper potential of market space that is not yet explored. [4]

The corner-stone of Blue Ocean Strategy is 'Value Innovation'. A blue ocean is created when a company achieves value innovation that creates value simultaneously for both the buyer and the company. The innovation (in product, service, or delivery) must raise and create value for the market, while simultaneously reducing or eliminating features or services that are less valued by the current or future market. The authors critique Michael Porter's idea that successful business are either low-cost providers or niche-players. Instead, they propose finding value that crosses conventional market segmentation and offering value and lower cost.

Clearly, search and advertising is a red ocean with existing leaders and several startups getting funded by venture capitalists. Microsoft would do much better to use both its existing assets and Yahoo! properties - to go after the new internets.


Like this article? We can deliver to your email. Or RSS. We never spam. No ads either.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Google 2.0, $100 billion revenue and my prediction

Larry Dignan of ZDNet has a post on how Google can get to $100 billion per some Wall St. analyst. And I want in on this scam. But before I pontificate, here is a quote from the blog post:

Google is projected by Wall Street to have annual revenue of $15.7 billion in 2008 and $19 billion in 2009. But the ambitions are higher–more like $100 billion in annual revenue. The big question: How will Google get there?

That question is being addressed in a report by Stephen Arnold, of ArnoldIT. Arnold made the rounds at Bear Stearns providing briefings about his report. In the report, Google 2.0: The Calculating Predator, Arnold analyzed Google’s patent pipeline and linked them to business strategies. Simply put, Arnold is trying to figure out what Google wants to be when it grows up.

Larry has some choice sub-headings like
  • Extrapolating Google’s potential business strategies takes guesswork.
  • Will math rule the world?
The discussion on how Google is building a hypercube and not a cube is just mind-blowing stuff. Why didn't I think of this? BigTable is better than a Table. So HyperCube is better than Cube. I think I am going to build the following artifacts:
  1. Meta Search Engine > Search Engine
  2. AllofyouTube > YouTube (In stead of you, I take care of all of you.)
  3. HMail > GMail
  4. Temporal Time Shifting Super Ultra xPhone with built-in customizable, configurable meta browser and support for WiMax... mmm... 3.0
Okay. Now, I fully understand how Google will get to $100 billion in revenue. Its basically by doing it in $30 billion dollar chunks, thrice.

But more importantly, I get how Arnold will get to a $10 million bonus soon:

Step 1: Come up with an outrageous revenue number for Google.

Step 2: Become famous. Drive business for the company (I assume ArnoldIT is his gig). $640 a pop, all it costs is about the price of one Google share.

Step 3:
Well, there is 2 paths to $10 million.

Step 3a:
If Google gets to $100bn in revenue, this guy becomes the biggest genius ever (in retrospective analysis). And gets to make probably much much more than my conservative $10 million estimate.

Step 3b:
If Google fails to get to $100bn in revenue, he follows Henry Blodget and writes a book. And with or without the book, all he needs to sell is a few thousand copies of the $640 report - 15,625 copies to be precise.


So, here is what I am predicting:
Arnold makes $10 million in personal income before Google makes $100 billion in revenue.

Note: My report on Arnold making $10 million will be available for $64 (one-tenth the cost of Arnold's report). I accept PayPal only. No Google Checkout payment facility available, yet.

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

AnshuBlog.com valuation hits $5 Trillion after private placement round

My blog is now worth $5 trillion dollars. My best friend (now, BFF) agreed to buy a 0.0000000010% stake in anshublog.com for $50.

I will hold an IPO in December and the shares will be priced at $85 (of course, there will 58,823,529,411 shares outstanding).

You can obtain a prospectus by sending me $25 by PayPal. ;)

Learning from Facebook

Om Malik and Kara write about the rumors that Microsoft is about to acquire a 5% stake in Facebook at a valuation of $10 billion.

Here are some practical ways of applying this method (there is a method to this madness) to great advantage in other spheres of life:

  • Propose with a 1% 10-Caret Diamond Ring: This would be 0.1 Caret ring but would make your fiance feel like a (1o-Caret) Princess (cut).
  • Tell your boss you have been offered a $300K job: You can ensure that you are not lying by asking your friend (who will then be your BFF) to pay you $10 for a 3-minute chore such as washing a dish. The trick is to annualize your salary.
  • Tell friends your blog gets 7.27 million-views-per-year: Note that you must not state that you get 7.27 million views in one year. In stead, state that you got hit at this rate - the trick is to measure over a 10 second period where you get 2 or more hits.
Send me your ideas. I am sure there are millions of good ideas I can come up with (since I came up with 3 in last 13 minutes - I just need to extrapolate.)

What do you think?

Monday, March 12, 2007

Don Dodge say VCs invest $40 billion with only $18bn in exit: some addional data points

Don Dodge has written an excellent piece Venture Capitalists and Angels invest $40 Billion per year but see only $18B in exits that Jeff Nolan and Jason Wood have commented on(hat tip to ). The core thesis of his post is that "exits have averaged $18B over the past 6 years while investments have averaged about $40B over the same time period. "

He further adds-

This can't go on forever. Or, maybe it can. Gamblers lose billions of dollars every year in Las Vegas...and have been happy to do so for over 50 years. VCs and Angels are big time gamblers and they love the game. One winner erases all the losers in their mind. I completely understand that because I think the same way.
Now as much as I love Black Jack as the next guy, I think these numbers may not reveal the full truth. The total value of all IPO exits for VCs is reported as $28.4 billion. I suspect that this figure is based on valuation at the time of the IPO. Let me prove by contradiction. (Okay, proof is a strong term, let me illustrate by way of an example.)

Google: Now here are some numbers reported to SEC (accoding to Venture Beat).
According to Google’s filings with the SEC, Sequoia Capital owns 23,893,800 shares in Google, now worth $4.42 billion on paper, and Kleiner Perkins has 21,043,711 shares, worth $3.89 billion on paper.
Now this was more than a year ago. Since then the value of the Google shares has gone up further, and the combined stake for the two VC firms in Google today would be $20,221,879,950 (at $450 a share, current prices). That is over $20 billion.

Yes, this argument is using the best case example. But I would surmise (and bet) that the same is true for other big exits. Salesforce.com investors for example 'exited' the company by way of an IPO at $11 i.e., less than $1 billion (market cap). Today the stake is worth 5 times the amount.

In that sense, an IPO exit is much more preferable than M&A because it allows further appreciation even after the exit.

At the same time, I do agree that the market value represented by the IPO price is an accurate measure. The fact that some shares appreicate in value after the IPO is supposedly reflected in the share prices.

What do you think? Are these calculations wrong? Or am I missing something very basic here?

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Prosper could get bigger than Google

Prosper is a P2P lender founded by former E-LOAN founder and CEO Chris Larsen and follows in the footsteps of Zopa, a UK based startup. Prosper has helped originate loans over $35 million over the last 18+ months. The unsecured consumer lending market is huge- if you think Google's potential playing field or EBay's universe of opportunity is large, consider this- in one quarter (fourth quarter, 2006) banks gave out $382 billion dollars in credit card and consumer loans. Or over a trillion dollars. Compare this with total internet advertising revenue of $4 billion dollars in the same quarter. (The global advertising market is $406 billion dollars annually)

I have followed Prosper for close to a year (see my earlier posts here and here,) and used it as a lender playing with $1000 to get a feel. So far, here are the statistics on my experience:

Loans:
Active loans: 14
Principal loaned: $657.79
Avg. interest rate: 18.52%

Late/Bad loans: 0
My APY, after fees is 18.04% - way more than what I have earned in other investments. Now, clearly this is not a typical experience and my appeptite for risk is higher. However, with this positive experience I am likely to lend more, and even consider borrowing when needed.

What is Prosper doing right? And wrong.
  • Listen: Prosper has reached out to its user community. I have been contacted for a user study and they have incorporated feedbacks from that session.
  • Growth at the right rate: Prosper is building a community and that requires time. The fact that they are dealing with real money requires trust to be built between Prosper and the users, and between borrowers and lenders. Over time, these borrowers and lenders will become the evangelists.
  • Ease of use, not AJAX: Yes, I love sexy UI's as much as the next valley guy but if you want a community site that welcomes everyone including 75 year old rich retiree as a lender, you want to keep the site easy and accessible.
And what is it they are doing wrong. I am still not satisfied with how much time it takes me to search and find good borrowers. The platform is too complex for new users and not powerful enough for savvy users. They ought to consider building a power tool (site) for heavy users and further simplify the user interface for others.

What do you think about prospects of Prosper? Do you prefer Zopa? What advantages do they enjoy over banks?

Saturday, February 24, 2007

VMWare versus Microsoft

According to NYTimes, VMWare is on a collision course with Microsoft. Although Microsoft will fight this battle for a long long time, the battle is probably already over in virtualization and VMWare is the winner. In some ways, the times could not be worse for Microsoft with a whole host of competitors in its various markets one upping them- SOHO (Google Apps, Intuit), On-Demand (Salesforce, NetSuite), Web2.0 (Google), Web platform (Amazon, Google).

VMWare appears poised to be one of the hottest IPOs of the year. EMC's market capitalization of $30+ billion has already gone up by $10 billion over the last 6 months, and the upcoming IPO may make EMC shareholders and VMWare employees and shareholders very happy.

Do you think Microsoft will have to start acquiring companies to buy growth? Or does it still have some multi-billion dollar eggs ready to hatch?