Saturday, February 25, 2012

Nimble Bit takes another bite at Zynga


Tiny Tower maker NimbleBit just took another bite at Zynga for copying their game with the launch of Dream Heights. First the guys at Nimble Bit wrote an open letter to Zynga.

And now, to the delight of their Tiny Tower players, they've created a new passive aggressive mission to win in-game currency.

The mission, "Beware of Dog" with a Bitizen dressed in a Devil costume includes the copy "After failing to buy your tower, a rival developer would like the following: 13,500 Tower Design (Architect Office), 2,500 City Sim (Game Studio)"
Tiny Tower's Beware of Dog Mission
It's no secret that many of Zynga's games are clones from other studios. In fact, this is pretty common practice across most social gaming companies.

I'm a captive audience for Tiny Tower, given that I've already invested time building my tower. I'm less likely to try Zynga's new game. However, it will be interesting what's going to happen. Unlike Facebook, where Zynga has a the offer bar, virality is a harder nut to crack with mobile. Social, on balance, is a lot harder to get right on mobile than on Facebook. Social games that have worked are either multiplayer or head-to-head games (like words with friends)

The ease of copying a game and the inability to protect the IP mean that companies like Nimble Bit have a couple different options: They can complain about it (which Nimble Bit did with dazzling pizzazz), double down on customer acquisition, and/or innovate.

While the jabs are definitely fun, Niimble Bit also needs to start pouring money to make sure they get in front of the user first. Apple's spotlight as the game of the year has been great, but the team needs to continually throw cash in becoming the first play for each new user. Continually innovating (which they have done) will help beef up retention from their player-base.

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Agile vs Waterfall – Improved Performance is NOT Guaranteed

Michael Marchi reminds us that Agile doesn't always perform faster than Waterfall. While Agile helps enables us to move faster, he reminds us that we still need to adhere to a robust definition of "done."
If allowed to go too far, a project team that tolerates this behavior could underperform even a Waterfall project. Agile done well will produce a positive effect. Agile done poorly can be worse than not doing Agile at all. The missed opportunities, nagging design flaws, overlooked defects, and the low quality that results is referred to as “Technical Debt”. The yellow shaded area represents this lost productivity.

Read the entire blog post here.

Friday, May 20, 2011

Can Google's Chromebook Break Windows [Network Effects]

Michael Mace provides his thoughts on whether or not Google's Chromebooks can break Windows:
I wish it were true.  Windows deserves to be replaced.  It's just plain old, weighted down with decades of compromises and tweaks.  The OS steadily degrades as you use it, and the security software companies will tell you privately that it's impossible to fully protect it from hostile software.  I'm sure that with a clean start we could do better.

So I love Google's idea.  Unfortunately, the Chromebook as currently defined is woefully unready to take on Windows.  It may capture some niches and verticals, but it won't have a major effect on the industry unless Google makes major changes to it.  And some of the biggest barriers to its success are inside Google itself.
The core argument underlying Mike's analysis centers around identifying the company that owns the network effects. Indeed, it is Microsoft with its OS and Office that own the network effects. When there is no clear owner of network effects, each technological generation completely opens up the field.  However, when there is a clear owner of network effects, the winner of the previous generation gets to carry over it's advantage. Think of it a football rivalry where the score never resets to zero. That is the case with Microsoft. Proof that it owns the network effects is in the pudding (Vista, anyone?).

Microsoft has been scoring for years. For Google Chromebooks to win, it needs a couple thousand points just to be close:
Once a computing platform is established, it's not enough to make a product that's better overall.  You have to duplicate the core benefits of the current product, and be so much better in some areas that you overcome the users' natural resistance to change.
For Google to win the network effects, it not only needs to build in features that elicit customer delight, but the basic must-haves for business operations.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Thank You Skyhook, Now It's Mine. Sincerely Apple and Google

Today both Google and Apple were asked to come before the US Senate judiciary subcommittee regarding a hearing on privacy, technology and the law. You can read TUAW's assessment as well as view a video of the opening statement by Senator Al Franken from today's hearings here.

Tracking Wi-Fi Stations
At the core, Android and iPhone devices have been tracking the locations of Wi-Fi signals. This is important because it allows the phone to know where you are.  Simplified, there are three main ways a phone can locate you: satellites,  cell towers and wi-fi signals.  Using triangulation algorithms, the phone calculates your position based any of these three methods.  However, there are draw-backs to both satellites and cell-towers. Satellites take forever and rarely work in urban situations where the signals gets bounced around. Cell towers are great for approximate location. It's through wi-fi signals that phones can pinpoint the location under 100 feet.
Comparing Wi Fi vs. GPS
However for Wi-Fi tracking to work, the phone needs to be know the location of the Wi-Fi signal it picks up. Additionally, the map of these Wi-Fi stations are constantly changing as individuals set up, move, or take down these routers.  While Google and Apple have been getting a lot of heat, Boson start-up Skyhook pioneered the technology.  In 2008, Apple decided to use Skyhook technology in its iPod and iPod Touch.

Thanks for showing me how its done

It wasn't long before both Google and Apple, who had originally licensed the technology and the data realized that they had the ability to build their own data layer. And thus, they did.  Skyhook is now fighting to stay ahead of the game and become the technology source for wi-fi enabled locationing. Recently Skyhook has sued Google for both patent infringement as well Google exerting its market influence on Motorola to switch providers. You can read the filing.

What should Skyhook do?
The case got me thinking, if I were the proverbial David being crowded out by Goliaths the likes of Google and Apple, what would I do?

Here's my breakdown:

Shifting Winds

Skyhook needs to fight or  at the mercy of platform providers (like Google and Apple), Skyhook requires a strategy that centers on the results of current suits and takes advantage of the shifting regulatory/political environment.  Beyond the current two suits Skyhook has with Google, recent shifts in both the consumer and political meme focusing on privacy and smartphone data collection may serve as an opportunity for Skyhook.[i] Indeed, we should watch carefully the questions and answers from both Apple and Google when they appear in front of Congress on May 10th.  Because the results of these two events have yet to play themselves out, I posit that Skyhook’s strategy should be played out in two stages.



Critiques on Competitive Advantages

IP/Regulation: Skyhook has a defensible patent portfolio around the technology. As mentioned previously, current political and consumer sentiment may also play a role in upcoming legislation. Skyhook needs to continually battle in courts and win. IfSkyhook can win core patent disputes, it has a defensible IP position. Then it can choose to either follow the route of ARM and become a friendly licensee or go aggressive and resemble the NTP/RIMM relationship.[ii]

Lastly, there is regulation risk. Should the US government decide to further open up the accuracy of GPS or if other foreign countries decide to offer higher grade GPS, it may lessen the importance of Wi-Fi locationing.



Brand: While Skyhook does not have a current brand advantage, the recent focus on smartphone and PND privacy on Google, Apple, Microsoft, and TomTom may be become an advantage of Skyhook.[iii]Skyhook needs to get in front of the issue and position itself as an independent third-party provider that puts the upmost care on protecting consumer privacy.  Indeed, its method of data collection sends point data, as opposed to anonymized user data.[iv]

Economies of Scale: Companies benefit from economies of scale. But the location dataset is constantly shifting. Because Google could no longer collect WiFi data from its streetview cars, it needs to find a way to build the database. [v] It remains to see what restrictions will be put on Google and Apple after the May 10th hearing.[vi]

Given the decaying nature of WiFi location maps, no current player has a sustainable advantage. This is a prime example of the Red Queen Effect.  A company needs to have a critical mass of distributed data collectors to build this competitive advantage. It can either build it itself or find a method of leveraging the crowd.  The latter is the more cost-efficient method, but companies must be careful due to increasing focus on privacy concerns.

Network Effects: While Skyhook does not have network effects, (as evidenced by both Apple and Google shifting), I question whether Apple or Google currently have it as well.

Employ a Horizontal Strategy where Reach is Paramount

A horizontal strategy is the best chance that Skyhook has to survive. Given its limited access to capital,Skyhook does not have the financial resources to deploy vertically down the value chain. Unlike Qualcomm, Skyhook does not have a secondary business for the company to go vertical only to become a horizontal player. Skyhook operates lean and under very tight cost controls.[vii] Given the length of the current litigation between itself and Google, its resources are even more constrained.  However, givenSkyhook’s patent portfolio, it may be able to exert some pressure if it can win favorable ruling in its current lawsuits.

The Race to Own the Database of Current Location Data

Skyhook occupies two portions of the value chain: location data and the location optimizing software.  In going horizontal, Skyhook needs to determine whether or not it wants to occupy both or just one piece. Location data is viewed as a critical asset for all the players involved and this is what all the companies will be fighting over. This is because owning the data adds the contextual understanding of the end-user. The ability to serve location-based advertising that understands that a user spends his time at a driving range once a week is projected to become a multi-billion dollar business.[viii] Additionally, providing precise location data is more useful to companies that approximate (e.g. Foursquare proximity check-ins versus Shopkick in store walk-ins) for companies business models.

Skyhook’s many rivals want to own this data. Skyhook’s rivals can be divided into four parts of the value chain:
Value Chain Example Companies
Device Apple, Nokia, Samsung, Motorola
OS Google, Apple, Nokia, Microsoft
Location MiddleWare Navizon
Applications Facebook, Foursquare


Horizontal Strategy > Prioritizing Potential Partners

With a horizontal strategy Skyhook should prioritize its strategic partners based on partners that can provide the most scale. For each vertical (e.g mobile phones, digital cameras, PCs, ereaders, portable gaming devices,[ix]etc), Skyhook should approach by: OS, Device, and then Apps.
  1. OS companies like Microsoft, Google, and Apple provide the greatest opportunity. However, it is acknowledged that over time, companies will want to build their own location databases.
  2. Component/Device Manufacturers: Provide the second most scale, while also allowing for the possibility of integrating its software with either the device or the processors.
  3. Applications: The application for wireless devices follows an immense long-tail. Focusing on larger apps like it current partners is desirable, but a bottoms-up approach will drain Skyhook’s already thin capital reserves.  Instead of inking deals with developers,Skyhook should open up its APIs to encourage developers to use its location platform.
A solid API strategy will enable Skyhook to grow it’s developer base beyond the initial 200 developers. [x] Skyhook’s API strategy should also focus on applications that require precise information. For example Augmented Reality will become an increasingly ubiquitous technology.



Two Steps: Win Patent, Win Race for Map Database
To date, Skyhook has filed two suits against Google. The first claims patent infringement. The second alleges “unfair and intentional interference with its contractual and business relationships.” The first claim of patent infringement will be critical to Skyhook’s long-term survival. This is because if the ruling is favorable, it can demand and gain licensing from anyone using location (other than GPS) on mobile devices to deliver information, content. [xi] The second claim will provide a payout that will help sustain Skyhook.

Beyond winning litigation, Skyhook has to maintain the largest DB for Map Data. Winning litigation will make it facilitate its strategy as it can employ a licensing strategy and provide value-added services. However, should it win and decide to trade rates much like Qualcomm, it is possible that larger firms with its access to capital may seek to forge methods to cut off Skyhook.  Should larger firms succeed,Skyhook will most likely move to become a patent holding company like NTP.  If it loses litigation, it will most likely lose the data DB game and become an acquisition target.



The 1-2-3s of Skyhook:

1.  Go Horizontal

·         Mobile, Devices, PCs, anything that connects to Wifi

2.  Build a Brand (Unlike Apple/Google)

·         Build on privacy concerns and differentiate

·         Leverage brand to get Congress to get Apple/Google to go to a 3rd party source of location data

3.  Defend IP and Win Map DB:






Notes:
[i] Swift, Mike. “Google emails highlight value of location data.” Silicon Valley Mercury News. http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_17960065
[ii] Stuart, Wienberg. “NTP In License Pact With Nokia.” Dow Jones Newswires (June 14, 2004). Excerpt below (Emphasis added):
Nokia Corp. (NOK) has licensed five NTP Inc. patents that are at the center of a dispute between NTP and Research In Motion Ltd. (RIMM).
In a four-line press release issued Monday afternoon, NTP said it entered into a license agreement with Nokia under U.S. patents 5,436,960, 5,625,670, 5,819,172, 6,067,451 and 6,317,592 and related issued patents and pending patent applications. The license covers all Nokia products and equipment, but excludes network communication services, the release said.
Last year, a Virginia court ruled that Research In Motion, maker of the BlackBerry wireless handheld device, had infringed on the five NTP patents. The court ordered Research In Motion to pay NTP $53 million, as well as an ongoing 8.55% royalty on the bulk of BlackBerry sales in North America. The court also ordered an injunction on BlackBerry sales in North America but immediately stayed the injunction pending an appeal.
[iii] Needleman, Ralph. “Reporters' Roundtable: The location-tracking dilemma.” CNET. (April 29, 2011). http://www.cnet.com/8301-30976_1-20058678-10348864.html
[iv] Yarrow, Jay. “Everything You Need to Know About How Phones Are Stalking You.” Business Insider. (April 28, 2011) http://www.businessinsider.com/skyhook-ceo-2011-4
[vi] Eaton, Kit. “Google Restarts Street View Info-Grab, Without Illegal Wi-Fi Snooping.” Fast Company (July 9, 2010) http://www.fastcompany.com/1668567/google-maps-street-view-wi-fi-wireless-snooping-personal-data-congress
[vii] Skyhook Wireless. Harvard Business School. April 7, 2009. Ref: 9-809-119
[x]Skyhook Wireless. Harvard Business School. April 7, 2009. Ref: 9-809-119

Saturday, October 30, 2010

If the web is dead, who pays for its funeral

The following post was cross-posted on the Berkeley DMEC blog.

Earlier this week, the iSchool invited Roy Bahat, President of IGN Entertainment, to share his thoughts on Chris Anderson's article, The Web is Dead.

Roy kicked-off the  conversation by looking  at several technologies and information systems--area codes, television channels, and world of warcraft.   Through those analogies, Roy highlighted his perspective on his interpretation of the web is dead:
  • Analogy of the web as a place is no longer relevant
  • Abundance destroys meaning
  • Ebb and flow between choice and simplicity
To Roy, the rise of applications is a return to a less fragmented and noisy world as people seek to reduce choice for simplicity. The web is as we know it is being replaced by an app state of mind.

If true, this has some amazing implications on the space. In the web-based world, the predominate monetization business model for websites was through advertising. The idea of free (also championed by Chris Anderson), has become the predominant way we view the web.

Credit Suisse estimates that the advertising revenue makes up 24.1% of total mobile web revenue opportunities (of an estimated $3.2B US Mobile revenue forecast). The remaining 75.9% ($2.5B) source from mobile paid apps. While we still see display advertising in applications (iAds, admob, and Yahoo!), this introduces a larger channel for who pays.

You, the consumer.

Along with the  shift to an app framework, monetization strategies will also change as individuals also become a viable revenue source. The question then becomes, how big will consumer driven revenue be in comparison to advertising driven revenue?

If this is true, it raises two important questions:
  1. Are consumers ready to pay their own way?
  2. What will brands do?
Roy Bahat will be teaching at the Haas School of Business in spring 2011. Both Roy and Chris will be speaking at the 6th Annual >Play conference today