Discussion about
11 thoughts on Google buying Motorola Mobility
1. This is about patents
Probably every single article I've read about the deal has mentioned Android's patent problems, and I doubt that Google would have bought Motorola Mobility if it were simply a handset maker; it's that vast trove of patents that drew Google in. In fact, Motorola Mobility CEO Sanjay Jha hinted last week that they might begin using their patent portfolio to make claims against other Android licensees, something which in retrospect turns out to have been a negotiating tactic. There's no doubt that Android is facing some very serious challenges, and buying Motorola Mobility will help Google play defense.
2. But it's also about control
Still, $12.5 billion seems like a lot to pay simply to get access to a bunch of patents (especially since having them only lessens -- but does not solve -- their IP difficulties), so either Motorola forced Google to buy the whole company just to get the patents or on some level Google just wanted to have wanted the hardware business as well.
Either way, Google is going to be making phones and is going to have to make the most of it. The good news is that when it comes to building smartphones and tablets it's clear there are some serious advantages to vertically integrating your hardware and software development. I'd guess that Google sees what Apple has been able to do with the iPhone and feels a little frustrated that they haven't been able to have more control over the phones that are getting released into the market. (Certainly one of the intentions behind the Nexus line was to prod the OEMs into pushing the envelope in terms of specs and design.)
The large number of manufacturers who have adopted Android helped them create a massive ecosystem of apps and developers that is so critical to success in mobile (it's a key challenge that any OS maker faces), so in a sense Google has already gotten a lot of what it wanted out of its original Android strategy. Now that Google has achieved that scale could they feel that the only way to truly take on Apple is to become more like them and assert more control?
3. This is a great deal for Motorola Mobility
Getting bought by Google is probably the best outcome Motorola could have hoped for given how things were going. Yes, the company's mobile business (which was split off along with some other pieces as its own company earlier this year) was brought back from the brink of disaster and is in much better shape than it was just a few years ago, but they have been struggling to hold onto market share in what is a vastly more competitive landscape. In Google they found a highly motivated buyer and who paid a premium for the company, all around this was a great deal for Motorola.
4. This is a big deal for Google as a company
Even though Motorola will be run as a separate business unit -- and separate from Android -- it's a big deal for them to be getting directly into the hardware business (not to mention how big a deal it is to be grafting on an entirely new business unit with its own huge workforce). It also signals a shift in how Google will make money. Until now Google has mainly been in the business of selling advertising. There are other ways they make money, but this is where most of their revenue comes from, and the strategy with Android has always been to give it away to manufacturers and then make money through showing ads on phones running the OS. Now Google is going to be making money from selling hardware. It's not entirely clear where all this will lead, but there is no way -- unless Google ends up just keeping the patents and spinning the rest of Motorola off to someone else -- that this won't have a huge impact on how Google thinks of itself as a company.
5. This is really going to piss off Google's partners -- but what are they going to do about it?
Even if everyone is all smiles publicly, secretly Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG, and HTC are fuming. None of them want to be competing directly against the company that makes the operating system they're relying on. The problem is as much as Microsoft is going to try and bring them fully over to Windows Phone (more on that later), Android is what's driving smartphone sales for all of these guys and they can't just suddenly abandon it. Google has to somehow convince its partners that this is really about preserving Android and solving its patent problems than about getting into the hardware game, and that given the alternatives they're all better off sticking with Android. Getting under Google's patent umbrella will certainly make them all a lot more comfortable, and I doubt we will see any big OEM abandoning Android within the next couple of years, but all of them have to be thinking about a backup plan of some kind now.
6. Google's new problem: Competing with your licensees rarely works
It didn't work for Palm, and it's going to be very tough for Google to avoid the same pitfalls. There are just too many conflicts of interest to overcome, and I doubt many Android licensees would have signed up had they had any inkling that Google was going to be getting into the phone business. The Nexus line has made them a bit nervous, but they were able to mitigate some of that anxiety by picking a major partner to build it for them (as opposed to just finding some contract manufacturer in China to do it). Now they're going to be in the awkward position of having to constantly choose between what's best for Android as an ecosystem and what's best for Motorola as a phone maker. Will Motorola get earlier access to Android than other partners? It'd certainly give them an edge when it comes to getting new phones to market, which is in Google's interest as a business, but it'd also alienate its OEM partners. Buying Motorola might help solve one problem, but in the process they've created another one that might mean the beginning of the end of their original vision of Android as a shared platform for mobile devices used by hundreds of different manufacturers.
7. It's not clear how the carriers are going to react
There are some things for them to be happy about, since they absolutely want someone to act as a counterweight to Apple and its growing influence, but they also don't love that Google basically has wanted to disintermediate them for years (and actually sort of tried and failed by originally trying to sell the Nexus One directly to consumers). One thing the carriers (well, apart from Sprint) have no love for is Google Voice, and it'll be interesting to see how much Google tries to bake it into to new Motorola phones.
8. Microsoft has some choices to make
Do they follow Google and Apple along the integrated path and buy Nokia? Or do they fully commit to being a software play and use Google's purchase to try and convince Samsung, LG, Sony Ericsson, and HTC that they shouldn't invest so much in Android? It may be that we look back on this as the moment when Microsoft started to turn things around and Windows Phone gained some real traction. I'm absolutely certain that Microsoft execs were on the phone with their counterparts at the OEMs today making their case, but it's going to be hard to overcome the fact that Nokia is Microsoft's preferred partner for Windows Phone. If you're a phone maker concerned about playing second fiddle to Motorola with Google, you might not be all that better off playing second fiddle to Nokia with Microsoft.
9. HTC has some tough choices to make
A few years ago HTC made what turned out to be a very prescient move when they got behind Android really early on. They realized that Windows Mobile was falling apart and that whatever succeeded it wasn't going to arrive early enough to keep handset sales afloat, and so hedged their bets with Android, which has turned out to be wildly successful for them.
Now it's leaving them exposed. Unlike Samsung, which has its own in-house OS (Bada), HTC is entirely dependent on Microsoft and Google, both of which could leave the company hanging. Looking back, it's clear that HTC probably should have bought Palm when it had the chance, both for its OS (as a hedge against Google and Microsoft screwing them over) and for its patents (you may have heard that HTC has some problems of its own there). It's going to be tough for HTC to create its own OS from scratch, but given the circumstances it's possible that they'll cozy up to Intel and get behind Meego, license webOS from HP, or even something really out there like partner up with Amazon (and perhaps even some other OEMs) and fork Android.
A more likely scenario is that they'll start shopping the company for a buyer. The only problem is that pool of potential buyers isn't so huge. A merger with Dell might make sense, given how much the PC maker has struggled with mobile, but it doesn't solve the underlying OS problem. Microsoft would almost certainly prefer to buy Nokia or RIM, though I do know they've kicked the tires on HTC before. Buying HTC might help HP scale up webOS, but the price tag is probably too high and HP probably feels like it already got everything it needed with Palm. Huawei or ZTE are both growing rapidly and might be interested as a way to gain entry to US and European markets, but HTC wouldn't be a cheap buy for either.
10. Nokia is feeling good right now about not picking Android
You can debate whether Nokia made the right choice in going with Windows Phone -- rather than, say, doubling down on Meego -- but after today's news you really can't argue that they should have gone with Android.
11. No matter what happens, it's going to be a long time before we see any real changes.
It will be a while before the deal even closes - it'll need to get regulatory approval first - and once that's done it will take even longer before we see the first handsets designed and built by the combined companies hit the market.
Probably every single article I've read about the deal has mentioned Android's patent problems, and I doubt that Google would have bought Motorola Mobility if it were simply a handset maker; it's that vast trove of patents that drew Google in. In fact, Motorola Mobility CEO Sanjay Jha hinted last week that they might begin using their patent portfolio to make claims against other Android licensees, something which in retrospect turns out to have been a negotiating tactic. There's no doubt that Android is facing some very serious challenges, and buying Motorola Mobility will help Google play defense.
2. But it's also about control
Still, $12.5 billion seems like a lot to pay simply to get access to a bunch of patents (especially since having them only lessens -- but does not solve -- their IP difficulties), so either Motorola forced Google to buy the whole company just to get the patents or on some level Google just wanted to have wanted the hardware business as well.
Either way, Google is going to be making phones and is going to have to make the most of it. The good news is that when it comes to building smartphones and tablets it's clear there are some serious advantages to vertically integrating your hardware and software development. I'd guess that Google sees what Apple has been able to do with the iPhone and feels a little frustrated that they haven't been able to have more control over the phones that are getting released into the market. (Certainly one of the intentions behind the Nexus line was to prod the OEMs into pushing the envelope in terms of specs and design.)
The large number of manufacturers who have adopted Android helped them create a massive ecosystem of apps and developers that is so critical to success in mobile (it's a key challenge that any OS maker faces), so in a sense Google has already gotten a lot of what it wanted out of its original Android strategy. Now that Google has achieved that scale could they feel that the only way to truly take on Apple is to become more like them and assert more control?
3. This is a great deal for Motorola Mobility
Getting bought by Google is probably the best outcome Motorola could have hoped for given how things were going. Yes, the company's mobile business (which was split off along with some other pieces as its own company earlier this year) was brought back from the brink of disaster and is in much better shape than it was just a few years ago, but they have been struggling to hold onto market share in what is a vastly more competitive landscape. In Google they found a highly motivated buyer and who paid a premium for the company, all around this was a great deal for Motorola.
4. This is a big deal for Google as a company
Even though Motorola will be run as a separate business unit -- and separate from Android -- it's a big deal for them to be getting directly into the hardware business (not to mention how big a deal it is to be grafting on an entirely new business unit with its own huge workforce). It also signals a shift in how Google will make money. Until now Google has mainly been in the business of selling advertising. There are other ways they make money, but this is where most of their revenue comes from, and the strategy with Android has always been to give it away to manufacturers and then make money through showing ads on phones running the OS. Now Google is going to be making money from selling hardware. It's not entirely clear where all this will lead, but there is no way -- unless Google ends up just keeping the patents and spinning the rest of Motorola off to someone else -- that this won't have a huge impact on how Google thinks of itself as a company.
5. This is really going to piss off Google's partners -- but what are they going to do about it?
Even if everyone is all smiles publicly, secretly Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG, and HTC are fuming. None of them want to be competing directly against the company that makes the operating system they're relying on. The problem is as much as Microsoft is going to try and bring them fully over to Windows Phone (more on that later), Android is what's driving smartphone sales for all of these guys and they can't just suddenly abandon it. Google has to somehow convince its partners that this is really about preserving Android and solving its patent problems than about getting into the hardware game, and that given the alternatives they're all better off sticking with Android. Getting under Google's patent umbrella will certainly make them all a lot more comfortable, and I doubt we will see any big OEM abandoning Android within the next couple of years, but all of them have to be thinking about a backup plan of some kind now.
6. Google's new problem: Competing with your licensees rarely works
It didn't work for Palm, and it's going to be very tough for Google to avoid the same pitfalls. There are just too many conflicts of interest to overcome, and I doubt many Android licensees would have signed up had they had any inkling that Google was going to be getting into the phone business. The Nexus line has made them a bit nervous, but they were able to mitigate some of that anxiety by picking a major partner to build it for them (as opposed to just finding some contract manufacturer in China to do it). Now they're going to be in the awkward position of having to constantly choose between what's best for Android as an ecosystem and what's best for Motorola as a phone maker. Will Motorola get earlier access to Android than other partners? It'd certainly give them an edge when it comes to getting new phones to market, which is in Google's interest as a business, but it'd also alienate its OEM partners. Buying Motorola might help solve one problem, but in the process they've created another one that might mean the beginning of the end of their original vision of Android as a shared platform for mobile devices used by hundreds of different manufacturers.
7. It's not clear how the carriers are going to react
There are some things for them to be happy about, since they absolutely want someone to act as a counterweight to Apple and its growing influence, but they also don't love that Google basically has wanted to disintermediate them for years (and actually sort of tried and failed by originally trying to sell the Nexus One directly to consumers). One thing the carriers (well, apart from Sprint) have no love for is Google Voice, and it'll be interesting to see how much Google tries to bake it into to new Motorola phones.
8. Microsoft has some choices to make
Do they follow Google and Apple along the integrated path and buy Nokia? Or do they fully commit to being a software play and use Google's purchase to try and convince Samsung, LG, Sony Ericsson, and HTC that they shouldn't invest so much in Android? It may be that we look back on this as the moment when Microsoft started to turn things around and Windows Phone gained some real traction. I'm absolutely certain that Microsoft execs were on the phone with their counterparts at the OEMs today making their case, but it's going to be hard to overcome the fact that Nokia is Microsoft's preferred partner for Windows Phone. If you're a phone maker concerned about playing second fiddle to Motorola with Google, you might not be all that better off playing second fiddle to Nokia with Microsoft.
9. HTC has some tough choices to make
A few years ago HTC made what turned out to be a very prescient move when they got behind Android really early on. They realized that Windows Mobile was falling apart and that whatever succeeded it wasn't going to arrive early enough to keep handset sales afloat, and so hedged their bets with Android, which has turned out to be wildly successful for them.
Now it's leaving them exposed. Unlike Samsung, which has its own in-house OS (Bada), HTC is entirely dependent on Microsoft and Google, both of which could leave the company hanging. Looking back, it's clear that HTC probably should have bought Palm when it had the chance, both for its OS (as a hedge against Google and Microsoft screwing them over) and for its patents (you may have heard that HTC has some problems of its own there). It's going to be tough for HTC to create its own OS from scratch, but given the circumstances it's possible that they'll cozy up to Intel and get behind Meego, license webOS from HP, or even something really out there like partner up with Amazon (and perhaps even some other OEMs) and fork Android.
A more likely scenario is that they'll start shopping the company for a buyer. The only problem is that pool of potential buyers isn't so huge. A merger with Dell might make sense, given how much the PC maker has struggled with mobile, but it doesn't solve the underlying OS problem. Microsoft would almost certainly prefer to buy Nokia or RIM, though I do know they've kicked the tires on HTC before. Buying HTC might help HP scale up webOS, but the price tag is probably too high and HP probably feels like it already got everything it needed with Palm. Huawei or ZTE are both growing rapidly and might be interested as a way to gain entry to US and European markets, but HTC wouldn't be a cheap buy for either.
10. Nokia is feeling good right now about not picking Android
You can debate whether Nokia made the right choice in going with Windows Phone -- rather than, say, doubling down on Meego -- but after today's news you really can't argue that they should have gone with Android.
11. No matter what happens, it's going to be a long time before we see any real changes.
It will be a while before the deal even closes - it'll need to get regulatory approval first - and once that's done it will take even longer before we see the first handsets designed and built by the combined companies hit the market.
All solid and salient points, as usual.
I think Google's best bet in trying to both license and use Android is to remain as fair as possible when it comes to things like new version releases. It will be impossible to keep the playing field completely level, but they should try as hard as they can- holding onto OEMs will be important.
What they can do, however, is use Moto as a sort of rudder to steer the Android ecosystem. Every Moto phone can be like a Nexus release for them- a chance to make something that lives up to what they want Android to be. They want NFC to be ubiquitous? Put it in every phone Motorola releases. They want to see more frequent OS updates? Push them out quickly to Moto devices. HTC, Samsung, and LG will have to follow suit to remain competitve.
I think Google's best bet in trying to both license and use Android is to remain as fair as possible when it comes to things like new version releases. It will be impossible to keep the playing field completely level, but they should try as hard as they can- holding onto OEMs will be important.
What they can do, however, is use Moto as a sort of rudder to steer the Android ecosystem. Every Moto phone can be like a Nexus release for them- a chance to make something that lives up to what they want Android to be. They want NFC to be ubiquitous? Put it in every phone Motorola releases. They want to see more frequent OS updates? Push them out quickly to Moto devices. HTC, Samsung, and LG will have to follow suit to remain competitve.
I'd be concerned that if Moto becomes the "reference" architecture for Android, that the carriers could always turn to the other Android OEs for non-reference (Nexus) handsets with all of the bloatware, etc. that comes with it.
For example, I can see Verizon shying away from a Motorola handset that is inextricably linked to the AOSP apps like Google Voice, Navigation, Hotspots, etc. in contrast to Verizon's alternatives (i.e. pay for their all your calls, use the VZW Navigation app, pay for tethering, etc.).
For example, I can see Verizon shying away from a Motorola handset that is inextricably linked to the AOSP apps like Google Voice, Navigation, Hotspots, etc. in contrast to Verizon's alternatives (i.e. pay for their all your calls, use the VZW Navigation app, pay for tethering, etc.).
You do realize that you still pay for all your cellphone call minutes with Google Voice?
If Verizon had a problem with G Voice and Navigation would they have been the first carrier to offer the services on the Droid a couple years ago?
As for tethering: Verizon offers Android products where hotspots are allowed at no charge (Xoom, Galaxy Tab) as well products where hotspot support costs extra.
If Verizon had a problem with G Voice and Navigation would they have been the first carrier to offer the services on the Droid a couple years ago?
As for tethering: Verizon offers Android products where hotspots are allowed at no charge (Xoom, Galaxy Tab) as well products where hotspot support costs extra.
great post! RIM has to be in a panic right now about what they are going to do. I also agree that its awhile in internet time (but pretty quick in manufacturing time) before we see a moto google hybrid offshoot - either on the handset or google tv side.
as an aside, i put a post up of my own on the google topic here: thevideouprising.com/manifesto/2011/8/16/googarola...
as an aside, i put a post up of my own on the google topic here: thevideouprising.com/manifesto/2011/8/16/googarola...
I hope HTC does choose to license webOS. They could do amazing things with such a great OS and their hardware. webOS running on a G2 anyone? or how about the classic example of an Evo? It could be all good... could.
When we consider the expense of this acquisition it's interesting to note that no one even blinked when Apple and Microsoft spent $4.5B for a bunch of useless patents a couple months ago. The only purpose of that acquisition was the keep Google from having them.
Also I have to call BS on the hardware/software integration myth about Apple's iOS product line. Really how much hardware/software synthesis is there in Apple's iOS product line? The same OS runs on all the different versions of phone until the hardware gets too slow or doesn't have enough RAM. Discreet screen resolutions is pretty much the only advantage (if it actually is one). Sure Apple does great ID and their new hardware is always the definition of sleek new shiny, but how exactly do they exploit this supposed advanced synergy with software? The gyroscope? Apple doesn't really have any competitive advantage from hardware/software integration, and I doubt MotoGoogle will either..
Also I have to call BS on the hardware/software integration myth about Apple's iOS product line. Really how much hardware/software synthesis is there in Apple's iOS product line? The same OS runs on all the different versions of phone until the hardware gets too slow or doesn't have enough RAM. Discreet screen resolutions is pretty much the only advantage (if it actually is one). Sure Apple does great ID and their new hardware is always the definition of sleek new shiny, but how exactly do they exploit this supposed advanced synergy with software? The gyroscope? Apple doesn't really have any competitive advantage from hardware/software integration, and I doubt MotoGoogle will either..
Since the end-user's experience of product quality is the combination of the software AND hardware, owning the whole "stack" of hardware and software, as Apple does, allows Apple to ensure their products work more reliably than anyone else. Tight integration between core software and the hardware on which it runs is paramount. When those pillars of technology reside in separate companies, there are too many obstacles to vetting niggling little bugs and incompatibilities that result in lesser quality in such integrated products. Such in-house development is no guarantee of a great product, but it is certainly more difficult if the engineers that work on the product are split across different companies with separate agendas.
It isn't alleged. If, as an engineer, you can walk down the hall to talk to the engineer that is working on a component whose interaction is causing problems, you can solve some niggling little problem (like, "what's draining battery life too much?"). If those engineers are split between two companies, then they may not even know who the other is, let alone be allowed to talk to the other. So it hurts those like Microsoft and Google, who do not build the end-product because it is more difficult to tune software and hardware as well as, say, Apple.
There are a myriad of quality and bug issues that affect end-users, like battery life, OS stability, overall reliability. "Owning the stack" does not guarantee a quality product, but it reduces the barriers to creating a great one.
There are a myriad of quality and bug issues that affect end-users, like battery life, OS stability, overall reliability. "Owning the stack" does not guarantee a quality product, but it reduces the barriers to creating a great one.
Not having tight integration between software development and hardware development hasn't been a liability for the Android platform.
If anything iPhone 4 has suffered from many integration issues -- most notoriously Antennae-gate, but also the white iPhone camera problems and the CDMA iPhone 4 OS fork. (You still can't upgrade from an iPhone 3GS to a CDMA iPhone 4.)
The advantages of single company hardware/software integration are mythical.
If anything iPhone 4 has suffered from many integration issues -- most notoriously Antennae-gate, but also the white iPhone camera problems and the CDMA iPhone 4 OS fork. (You still can't upgrade from an iPhone 3GS to a CDMA iPhone 4.)
The advantages of single company hardware/software integration are mythical.
That makes as much sense as taking a statement Apple makes about Google at face value.
Secondly, Google says "largely questionable" at the most which is not even close to "useless." The rest of the industry, however doesn't agree with this nor did Google *itself*, considering they big 4 billion on those same patents. You don't bid 4 billion on something useless.
Secondly, Google says "largely questionable" at the most which is not even close to "useless." The rest of the industry, however doesn't agree with this nor did Google *itself*, considering they big 4 billion on those same patents. You don't bid 4 billion on something useless.
One thing that everyone commenting on the Google deal with Motorola are ignoring are how the present financial condition of Motorola impacts Google. People forget that Google is a public company with investors. Its stock price have down well because Google's profits have had fantastic growth and almost every last penny of that profit comes from advertising sales. The other reasons Google stock has performed well is that its operating margin is large: i.e., it makes about 33 cents of profit for each $1 dollar of revenue. Motorola by contrast has zero profit and an operating margin under 1 percent. As Motorola has 1/3 the revenue of Google's revenue, when the company is absorbed into Google it will have a big impact on Google's financial reporting every quarter. Almost immediately, Google's operating margin will plummet. Botton line, Google is buying a company that is unprofitable. Buying patents is a cost. Remember, Android is given away for free in the hopes it will generate more eyeballs on the interent and more advertising revenue for Google. Google has yet to release metrics demonstrating that its investment in Android is generating profits. And since Motorola hasn't become profitable, let alone highly profitable, selling Android phones, Google will have a big struggle turning Moto around. Again, its not just about being a customer of Google. These companies are businesses and its strange that no one focuses on the massive financial differences between the two companies. I posted this point here:
macsfuture.com/post/8957968236/as-you-may-have-hea...
macsfuture.com/post/8957968236/as-you-may-have-hea...
These are great points -- but I have to believe that Google thinks the can turn a handy profit on Motorola, and if they had NOT bought Motorola, they might be facing the prospect of LOSING large sums on every handset sold because of licensing fees.
Many good, business-savvy points, Peter. I personally think Google is a lot more eager to get in the hardware business than they're acting. The patent deal is how they're selling it to the press and their partners. For a long time they've been watching Apple print currency with their handset business, while they naively promised long ago to give away Android (and its code!) for free. I suspect they're making a whole lot less money from selling ads on handsets than they get from their web ad business -- less than Eric Schmidt bet on, and that bet may have cost him his job. I think they've been eating their hearts out watching Android clobber Apple in the marketplace, as they pour their best people pour onto the project and make enough to buy a cup of coffee and a sandwich, while Apple -- the loser, mind you! -- becomes the richest company in the world. I think that, in the long run, they could care less what their partners think, because that's business -- and they are determined to be more than an ad agency -- and they long for the day when handsets and hardware account for 10, 20, or 30 percent of revenues. And I think that people who suppose that Google will give away "patent protection" to their partners for free are being naive. I would not be surprised to see a day when Google charges a "modest" fee, maybe 20%, to all official Android partners, so they can have access to these patents and counter-sure their adversaries.
To your points 5 and 6, indeed, not only Palm but notably Nokia could not pull it off. Palm spun its OS group off to PalmSource and Nokia attempted to independent-ize Symbian as the Symbian Foundation. In both cases, though, Palm and Nokia continued to be the only _significant_ "licensee" of those systems. (Having seen the debacle of Palm —> PalmSource, I immediately predicted the end of Symbian as soon as it was spun off as the Symbian Foundataion).
But Google eating up MotoMob is different, so those patterns won't necessarily apply. (1) Android was established independently, first (as opposed to being spun off from an integral component of a competitive hardware manufacturer); and (2) it isn't clear (is it?) that Google will retain the product arm of MotoMob—making this a moot point.
If Google does continue to allow the Moto group to develop product, it could anoint various external manufacturers for future Nexus phones, proving to the Open Handset Alliance that Google would not be giving second-shrift to OHA members—now, that'd be interesting! In this case, Google could say that it is using its in-house Moto group as a test-bed for Andoid and advise OHA members on design issues.
But Google eating up MotoMob is different, so those patterns won't necessarily apply. (1) Android was established independently, first (as opposed to being spun off from an integral component of a competitive hardware manufacturer); and (2) it isn't clear (is it?) that Google will retain the product arm of MotoMob—making this a moot point.
If Google does continue to allow the Moto group to develop product, it could anoint various external manufacturers for future Nexus phones, proving to the Open Handset Alliance that Google would not be giving second-shrift to OHA members—now, that'd be interesting! In this case, Google could say that it is using its in-house Moto group as a test-bed for Andoid and advise OHA members on design issues.
I think we may be seeing some announcements about opening the patent pool up to a sharing deal with official partners once this goes through. If so, I don't think any of the partners will mind Motorola getting "teacher's pet" status. This could be the best thing that ever happened to HTC, aside from getting bought by Google themselves.
Another thought on the patent pool idea... maybe this is how Google will get control of the Android ecosystem, by offering companies the opportunity to become a partner, at which point they get access to the patents, with the one stipulation being that only their phones that use the official Google Experience ROM are covered. Triple win! Google gets control without looking like an Apple dictatorship, partners get free patent immunity, and customers get a clean Android. Come on, Google, make it so.
A couple thoughts I had last night.
Google's going to get a lot more pressure from Wall Street and shareholders now to make Android as profitable for Google as iOS is for Apple. They've poured over a year's profits from Adsense into a hardware company that was losing money and software they give away for free. That's money they could have given back to shareholders as a dividend or used for stock buy-backs to boost the price. Already Google's stock price has taken a hit from the deal and a number of banks have downgraded the stock. Android might be 'free', but it's an enormous cost to Google now. It needs to start paying its own way.
Washington is going to be tougher in anti-trust investigations concerning Google. Initial indications are that FTC approval of the Motorola deal is going to take a long time and Congress already has scheduled hearings into anti-competitive practices of Google search. There's no guarantee they're going to be nice to Google as the extend their reach into mobile.
Google's going to get a lot more pressure from Wall Street and shareholders now to make Android as profitable for Google as iOS is for Apple. They've poured over a year's profits from Adsense into a hardware company that was losing money and software they give away for free. That's money they could have given back to shareholders as a dividend or used for stock buy-backs to boost the price. Already Google's stock price has taken a hit from the deal and a number of banks have downgraded the stock. Android might be 'free', but it's an enormous cost to Google now. It needs to start paying its own way.
Washington is going to be tougher in anti-trust investigations concerning Google. Initial indications are that FTC approval of the Motorola deal is going to take a long time and Congress already has scheduled hearings into anti-competitive practices of Google search. There's no guarantee they're going to be nice to Google as the extend their reach into mobile.
Google has stated Android is profitable. This acquisition will no doubt change that balance sheet, but...
It is not as if the money Google is spending for Moto is gone. They are not spending it on a big party. They will own a major cellphone and device company as well as all of its assets including an IP portfolio that is proving essential to Google's business objectives in mobile, home and set-top.
Sure some parts of MMI are struggling, but many parts are profitable.
Also Moto reportedly has $3B in cash.
It is not as if the money Google is spending for Moto is gone. They are not spending it on a big party. They will own a major cellphone and device company as well as all of its assets including an IP portfolio that is proving essential to Google's business objectives in mobile, home and set-top.
Sure some parts of MMI are struggling, but many parts are profitable.
Also Moto reportedly has $3B in cash.
Google may want everyone to think that it's all about patents, but FOSS Patents blog (fosspatents.blogspot.com/) has some pretty damning evidence that MMI patent portfolio isn't worth much (both Apple and Microsoft are suing MMI and, additionally, a lot of MMI patents are of FRAND kind).
It's important to recognize that the author of "FOSS Patents" is not an IP lawyer and doesn't disclose who he works for.
Florian Mueller is not a lawyer, but he seems to have enough experience to take his opinion into account. His Blogger profile also discloses his affiliations and links to his LinkedIn profile (www.blogger.com/profile/13298342449544124176).
Are you saying he's biased like John Gruber?
FWIW, S&P downgraded Google stock and cited concerns about quality of MMI patent portfolio (fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/miami-court-deals...).
Are you saying he's biased like John Gruber?
FWIW, S&P downgraded Google stock and cited concerns about quality of MMI patent portfolio (fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/miami-court-deals...).
Show me a single posting by Mueller where he depicts Google or their partners in a positive light. Now it may be that Google and their partners are always incompetent or perhaps actually evil when it comes to intellectual property. I don't know. But Mueller only seems to be able to find Google's dark side.
Last fall and winter Mueller showed himself to be quite a bit of a legal jackass when he claimed to have found evidence of Google violating Sun's and Oracle's copyrights.
"The copyright part of Oracle vs. Google"
fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/11/copyright-part-of...
"New evidence supports Oracle's case"
fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/01/new-evidence-supp...
Analysis by other parties found nothing to get so excited about:
"New alleged evidence of Android infringement isn't a smoking gun"
arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2011/01/new-alleg...
"Oops: No copied Java code or weapons of mass destruction found in Android"
www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/oops-no-copied-java-co...
Like Gruber he seems to have conveniently changed his position on software patents. He used to bill himself as an advocate for software patent reform, but Mueller has since removed all references to software patent reform and FOSS from his bio profile, and last year he changed his FOSS Patents blog tag line from:
"THIS BLOG COVERS HOW SOFTWARE PATENTS THREATEN FREE AND OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (FOSS) AND WHAT ACTION CAN BE TAKEN TO DEAL WITH THE THREAT."
to:
"THIS BLOG COVERS SOFTWARE PATENT NEWS AND ISSUES WITH A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON WIRELESS, MOBILE DEVICES (SMARTPHONES, TABLET COMPUTERS)."
I don't know who pays him. He claims to hold no stocks, and he works as a consultant.
Last fall and winter Mueller showed himself to be quite a bit of a legal jackass when he claimed to have found evidence of Google violating Sun's and Oracle's copyrights.
"The copyright part of Oracle vs. Google"
fosspatents.blogspot.com/2010/11/copyright-part-of...
"New evidence supports Oracle's case"
fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/01/new-evidence-supp...
Analysis by other parties found nothing to get so excited about:
"New alleged evidence of Android infringement isn't a smoking gun"
arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2011/01/new-alleg...
"Oops: No copied Java code or weapons of mass destruction found in Android"
www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/oops-no-copied-java-co...
Like Gruber he seems to have conveniently changed his position on software patents. He used to bill himself as an advocate for software patent reform, but Mueller has since removed all references to software patent reform and FOSS from his bio profile, and last year he changed his FOSS Patents blog tag line from:
"THIS BLOG COVERS HOW SOFTWARE PATENTS THREATEN FREE AND OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (FOSS) AND WHAT ACTION CAN BE TAKEN TO DEAL WITH THE THREAT."
to:
"THIS BLOG COVERS SOFTWARE PATENT NEWS AND ISSUES WITH A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON WIRELESS, MOBILE DEVICES (SMARTPHONES, TABLET COMPUTERS)."
I don't know who pays him. He claims to hold no stocks, and he works as a consultant.
S&P didn't not downgrade Google stock because of concerns about the quality of the MMI patent portfolio. What S&P said was, "Moreover, despite MMI’s extensive and valuable patent portfolio, we are not sure it will protect Android from IP issues." That is, they are uncertain that MMI's patent portfolio gets Android, Google and the other Android partners out of the woods. That seems like a reasonable statement from an analyst given the complexity of the patent litigation landscape against MMI, Google and their other partners.
I agree patents were the primary motivating factor here, but I wouldn't discount STBs. Unless the Google is ready to kill its TV project (it seems to be floundering pretty badly), it could be an excellent opportunity for them to get distribution on STBs in households. Linking profiles with television is a golden opportunity to distribute relevant & targeted ads based on prior keyword searches.
I wish you guys would get over Windows Phone 7. Every time something happens in the smartphone market we hear "This may be good news for WP 7". Windows Phone 7 has all the potential of the Zune. A nice platform with zero chance of success. You could zap 50,000 volts through this turkey and it wouldn't take off. After almost a year on the market it has absolutely zero traction and Microsoft's efforts to promote it are inept at best. Indeed, its main claim to fame has been the destruction of Nokia's marketshare and stock price since Elop announced ditching Symbian and Meego in favour of Windows Phone 7. This has become known as the "Elop Effect"
The only support I hear for WP 7 comes from a few US tech journalists, the European tech press lost interest in WP7 quite some time ago.
Windows Phone 7 has 1.1% of the global smartphone market. I declare Windows Phone 7 dead.
The only support I hear for WP 7 comes from a few US tech journalists, the European tech press lost interest in WP7 quite some time ago.
Windows Phone 7 has 1.1% of the global smartphone market. I declare Windows Phone 7 dead.
At least one patent guru is saying the Motos patent portfolio may not be as powerful as it appears:
fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/first-reaction-to...
He makes the telling point that Motorola's patents didn't deter Apple and Microsoft for suing, in a case that's still unsettled, and observes there's no reason to think that Google's ownership will bring anyone to the negotiating table any sooner.
I'm increasingly convinced that the patent acquisition, while a real motive, is being used right now as a smoke screen to disguise Google's larger plan from its partners -- and from Apple and Microsoft. I think the free Android ride is OVER as of now, that we're going to see a new wave of fairly awesome Google-branded handsets sooner rather than later, and that Google could care less what its partners think, because they're making very little (if not realizing a loss) from the current arrangement. If Android's market share shrinks but Google's profits rocket, I doubt they'll care about perceptions. As it stands, Android is beating Apple iOS bloody in the marketplace, yet its Apple, not Google, who just became the world's most richly capitalized company. I think Google mightily covets its fair share of the smartphone pie, and the "Android for free" model just isn't working for them. We;re about to see plan B unfold.
fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/08/first-reaction-to...
He makes the telling point that Motorola's patents didn't deter Apple and Microsoft for suing, in a case that's still unsettled, and observes there's no reason to think that Google's ownership will bring anyone to the negotiating table any sooner.
I'm increasingly convinced that the patent acquisition, while a real motive, is being used right now as a smoke screen to disguise Google's larger plan from its partners -- and from Apple and Microsoft. I think the free Android ride is OVER as of now, that we're going to see a new wave of fairly awesome Google-branded handsets sooner rather than later, and that Google could care less what its partners think, because they're making very little (if not realizing a loss) from the current arrangement. If Android's market share shrinks but Google's profits rocket, I doubt they'll care about perceptions. As it stands, Android is beating Apple iOS bloody in the marketplace, yet its Apple, not Google, who just became the world's most richly capitalized company. I think Google mightily covets its fair share of the smartphone pie, and the "Android for free" model just isn't working for them. We;re about to see plan B unfold.
A non-lawyer "patent guru" with undisclosed patronage. Notice how this FRAND issue never comes up in his discussions of MPEGLA and WebM.
"because they're making very little (if not realizing a loss) from the current arrangement." That's absolutely silly. HTC and Samsung for example are making a fortune selling Android handsets. And Motorola Mobility is probably making a profit from its Android handset business. (I don't think they break out business results from parts of their business.)
There's no evidence that "Android for free" is not working for Google or it's partners.
"because they're making very little (if not realizing a loss) from the current arrangement." That's absolutely silly. HTC and Samsung for example are making a fortune selling Android handsets. And Motorola Mobility is probably making a profit from its Android handset business. (I don't think they break out business results from parts of their business.)
There's no evidence that "Android for free" is not working for Google or it's partners.
You misunderstand my position -- by "they" I mean GOOGLE and Google alone.
HTC and Samsung are manifestly making money hand over fist from Android for Free. And that very fact must stick in Google's craw as it contemplates what it is NOT making. If you can show me any balance sheet that breaks out what Google makes from advertising on Android handsets, please do so.
In any case, we have only to wait and see. If Google/Motorola doesn't start turning out an amazing new crop of Google branded phones with all the features we have been denied for the past two years, including custom-skinning software and RIGHT-ON-TIME, SIMULTANEOUS UPDATES a la Apple, all this by next summer, call me a disappointed dreamer. But I can guarantee you that Google's partners are having worried meetings right now about this very prospect. Some kind of fee is in the offing for them, because Google will soon not need them so badly anymore. Google has been reasserting control of Android all year by withholding the latest release, and I contend this us just the beginning.
HTC and Samsung are manifestly making money hand over fist from Android for Free. And that very fact must stick in Google's craw as it contemplates what it is NOT making. If you can show me any balance sheet that breaks out what Google makes from advertising on Android handsets, please do so.
In any case, we have only to wait and see. If Google/Motorola doesn't start turning out an amazing new crop of Google branded phones with all the features we have been denied for the past two years, including custom-skinning software and RIGHT-ON-TIME, SIMULTANEOUS UPDATES a la Apple, all this by next summer, call me a disappointed dreamer. But I can guarantee you that Google's partners are having worried meetings right now about this very prospect. Some kind of fee is in the offing for them, because Google will soon not need them so badly anymore. Google has been reasserting control of Android all year by withholding the latest release, and I contend this us just the beginning.
All this talk about android and phone! It's not just about Google buying Motorola for building handset. Google wants a complete ecosystems to extend it's advertising empire. The reason Google purchased Android was it didn't want to any company between it and the mobile users eye balls and it's ads empire. Apple ecosystem will soon is a threat to Google. The iPhone and iPad will soon be joined by a real AppleTV. By purchasing Motorola first for the IP, but also as a means to generate a total Android phone, Android tablet, Android Motorola Cable box (think GoogleTV) all working together connected to Google Advertising systems.
follow this discussion
share:
Products mentioned
28 users following this discussion, including:
This discussion has been viewed 3867 times.
Last activity .