Marketing Memos

Receive Marketing Memos via Email

By APNWLNS payday loans

August 21, 2012

Growing Up

As many Americans prove daily, it is easier to grow wider than it is taller.

Silicon Strategies Marketing is currently consulting with a company that has a fairly wide reach in their market, which is the foundational side of their industry. They serve companies at the middleman and retail level, and on a regional basis are fairly dominant, though they have both room for improvement and the option of growing geographically. Their other option is to go vertical, to begin competing with their existing customers and earn money they otherwise help their customers earn.

The trade-off for companies in such positions is complex. To grow, a company needs to provide new value and by doing so attract new customers. Or they need to gather more customers of the type they currently serve, which typically involves taking them from competitors. The last option is to find ways of making money by adding more of the total supply chain to final product.

Horizontal growth is not always possible. There are limits to the number of customers in any market. Some companies do not have the fortitude to grow geographically as it requires releasing more control to more middle managers and junior executives. Due to legal and jurisdictional issues, some companies cannot grow beyond certain borders. Yet horizontal growth is the fastest and safest method since it basically involves doing what the company already does well. There are no new operational modes to master, no new disciplines to learn, and no new brands to build. But there is a limit to how widespread some companies can be.

Growing vertically is a big challenge, but one that redefines entire industries, and as any savvy marketing maven will confess, changing the rules of a market is a great way to win. Some companies grow vertically by taking work away from their suppliers (imagine a smartphone maker buying a chip manufacturer and thus becoming their own supplier, or HP opening their own string of retail outlets). This approach is complex because it requires entering markets and developing processes unfamiliar to the core company. This isn’t to say it is impossible – Apple was not a retail operation, but their stores have become a success in selling goods and deepening the Apple brand. In the process, Apple earned revenues normally forfeited to retail channels.

There is no rule of thumb, but two realities are plain enough. Growing horizontally is simpler and safer. But competitive and market shifting realities may start a consolidation of the value chain above or below a company, and thus require them to grow vertically. If Apple’s retailers had suddenly consolidated, they would have great leverage over Apple. Likewise if mobile chip companies had consolidated, their supply chain might be compromised. Growing vertically can be profitable and occasionally necessary.

The strategy lesson herein is that marketing executives need to monitor both their growth opportunities (horizontal and vertical) as well as over/under market shifts and calculate trade-offs between growth paths. They also cannot afford to play it safe if their markets are becoming unsafe.

April 28, 2010

HP Handsets

Just keep reminding yourself that Compaq was an odd deal too.

Today Hewlett Packard palmed Palm for whopping $1.2B, or about 1/10th of HP’s petty cash.  This was newsworthy for many reasons including the fact that Palm’s struggling handset line will now join HP’s struggling handset line (bet you forgot that HP makes cell phones — so did the rest of the market).  In a world where RIM owns the corporate market, Apple owns the consumer market, Microsoft hasn’t helped HP’s market, and Google/Android are changing the rules of the market, this marriage seems slightly more absurd than half of Hollywood hook-ups.

The deal is not without upside.  First, the market for mobile is not yet saturated.  Especially on the low end, there is plenty of green field. As unlocked handsets become more prevalent and popular, HP can use its retail savvy to shove cell phones into public ears.  I can almost here the cashier at Wal Mart saying “Would you like some printer cartridges with that?”

Interestingly, Todd Bradley is a top executive in HP’s Personal Systems Group and was also a former CEO of Palm.  In announcing the acquisition, Bradley noted that Palm had a lot of intellectual property, some 1,650 patents.  These alone might be worth the acquisition as it allows HP to license and monetize the investment, or choke the life out of competitors.  HP is not immune to litigating, though it is not their forte.

Otherwise the only item Palm brings to the table is a mobile OS, one so innovative and exciting that the market didn’t even bother to yawn.  In an industry where driving component cost down while improving the user experience is 90% of the battle, incorporating the Android OS makes much more sense, as recent mobile market share data shows.  Some speculate that HP wants a private OS to spread across handsets, slates and device types to be named later.  But buying Palm for this is like buying a deceased nag to run the triple crown.

Odds of winning are about the same.

All in all this appears to be an insider deal, were former Palm executives working in HP are overly optimistic about alleged synergies and product potentials.  But as far as technology companies go, HP has successfully merged other entities and made a buck or two.  The Compaq merger worked despite many misgivings (I had my doubts, but the dual brands and economies of scale in standardized PCs let HP take top honors away from Dell).  But HP has had its share of acquisition and partnership failures too (DEC via the Compaq deal is nothing, and outside of HP-UX nobody uses Itanium, much to Intel’s chagrin).

From an outside perspective, the market dynamics look oddly promising.  The smart phone market is growing at nearly a 40% CAGR clip and mobile data is almost the new norm.  But smart phones as a percent of all cell phones are still relative small –around 10% of all handsets according to some 2009 data and projections.  So perhaps HP is merely betting the long game — that by acquiring Palm and getting WebOS in shape, HP can catch the break of the new wave.

The problem is that HP needs to add something that the competition has not or cannot.  Palm has failed, and HP’s mobile bread is currently buttered by Microsoft, who is losing market share faster than Steve Ballmer is losing hair.  Assuming that HP cannot add magic (and, face it, they don’t do that very often), then they will have to compete on price.  Perhaps Palm’s IP combined with Compaq’s mass manufacturing prowess will shove deeply discounted smart phones into the market.  Given the bargains you can get on consumer edition HP and Compaq desktops and laptops at every office supply store on the planet, this might well be where HP is heading.

There is no marketing lesson today.  Just stunned wonder.

UPDATE: Perhaps I spoke too soon.  HTC announced that they are going to run and run hard with Android in an attempt to saturate the smart phone market.  They have a head start and will likely beat HP to the wave crest.  The marketing lesson is that if you see a hot mass market ready for exploiting, so do your competitors.  If they have a faster and cheaper approach than you, expect to lose.

 
Contact    Site Map    Search    Privacy    Copyright