Apple has bought Silicon Valley based P.A. Semi, a processor design firm. At first sight it seems to not make too much sense to buy a processor design company and for P.A. Semi, which is late in its target markets, telecommunications and medical devices, just a great exit deal. Now the blog community speculates why Apple would do that. Common wisdom is that chip making is a pure economy-of-scale innovation race. You need to be able to come up with a new technology first or with the first ones to make some healthy margins, and most importantly be able to win design-in projects. Then when competitors catch up you are already designed in and can even live with diving prices as shipments ramp up. A game that P.A. Semi seems to have lost as they were late with their products and missed many design-in possibilities. That P.A. Semi has not had any design-in wins with the mobile infrastructure players (Ericsson, Nokia Siemens, Alcatel Lucent, ...) I know first-hand.

Now what has attracted Steve Jobs to buy this company?

I think it is all about differentiation. With Apple competitors catching up against the iPhone (Android and others) it is key for Apple to build better and most importantly unique products. Apple seems to expect that P.A. Semi can help them do that in particular with being able to integrate video and data communications functionality in a very low power design. In the end, people buy Apple gadgets not because they are cheaper but because they offer a better designed and a more usable product that also looks better than the rest.

If P.A. Semi again does not deliver then at the least Apple has better negotiation power with the chip suppliers which will pay the price for P.A. Semi easily by itself. Overall a no-risk deal for Apple it seems.

FastCompany has a story about the huge commercial success of the US Major League Baseball video website. I nearly skipped reading it as I am not a baseball fan and also did not think that video distribution on the web is such a great story to read about. But we had recently the pleasure to look into sports video online distribution as well for a new assignment, so I was primed to read this article. I am glad I did as it unveiled some very interesting news for me. While the US Baseball association is not supposed to be one that by nature links itself to high-tech due to the game itself and also the fact that more middle age and older people like the sport, with this video site they are at the cutting edge. Now here the story in numbers:

• started the project in 2000 with $75 million investment from 30 clubs (each club
  put in the equivalent of a yearly salary of one middle infield player)
• 2005 revenue: $236 million, 2007 revenue: $450 million
• they now also run the video sites (provide hosting and services) for other US sports organizations such as U.S. Figure Skating Association, Major League Soccer. The videos of an NCCA basketball tournament were shown online through them as well, which drew 17million viewers
• the money comes from a yearly subscription fee of $89, which is cheaper than the yearly cable TV subscription

I was watching one of my favorite movies on DVD last night, The English Patient. While watching I asked myself why it is my favorite movie or more interestingly what makes great movies and is there anything we can learn for product marketing too?

To make the answer more simple although less representative let's see why I like this movie. I simply assume I am not entirely different so we can derive generic clues from it - maybe.

• great story. there are two stories in this movie (in Egypt and in Italy) and they go back and forth between the two. I sort of like it as it challenges you when watching and gives an intellectual touch to it as well. I am sure literary types would be able to explain this better.
• great people. Of course in a movie it is the actors and actresses that make the difference. I am a fan of Juliette Binoche and have seen most of her films. Why do I like her? She has character, at least in her movies. Always playing very convincingly and it seems she is a down to earth person, loves natural realistic roles. I trust that what she plays is also what she thinks. Maybe I would be very disappointed if I were to meet her in real life and if she were not as she acts, but we are talking about movies now. Also Ralph Fiennes and the great Kristin Scott Thomas or the authentic William Dafoe are great. All immersed into their roles with their full heart.
• flying scenes. I am a private pilot myself or at least was one when still living and working in Silicon Valley. The flight scenes in the movie over the dessert get me dreaming of experiencing this beauty myself. I am sure it is part of the reason why I like this movie.
• good entertainment. Love story, adventure, wartime, betrayal, jealousy, gorgeous landscapes, mystery (some), excitement (looking for land mines or looking at great art in a chapel in dark), revenge, English decadence during colonial times, caring for the weak and injured, loneliness, cruelty, men society, danger, fun, technical competency (an Indian guy looking for land mines), personal tragedy, ancient art, sexuality, friendship, natural challenges (sandstorm in the dessert), great story telling, foreign cultures, sexual desire and fascination, guilty conscience, action, bad guys, spies, loyalty, ... (this list I wrote down while watching the movie )
• intellectual challenge: in between, the conversations have good content and one has to concentrate to be able to follow or at least to understand the nuances.
• foreign cultures. It plays in Egypt. Arabic countries have a certain mystery and attraction to me, I admit. Not that I know much at all about them, but I feel I will engage more and try to better understand them.

So I guess with the above list one could assemble a list of required attributes for good product marketing. At the least it was interesting for me to see if it is possible maybe.

Dear Sir,

Please unsubscribe me from your internet.

My email address is: XXXXX@XXXXXXXXXX.com

Thank You

Always,

Joyce

P.S. My internet gets too full all the time.

This post is a nice story and reminds me of my mother-in-law. You also need to read the comments. One of them sums it up nicely I think:

I bet this lady knows how to do a whole bunch of stuff most of us haven’t got a clue about and may need someday.

Who cares what I said yesterday? Who was giving in in the negotiations? History shows that it was never Steve Jobs...

The iPhone is coming to 10 Vodafone markets, as Engadget found out:

Australia, the Czech Republic, Egypt, Greece, Italy, India, Portugal, New Zealand, South Africa and Turkey.

Update: Heise Online thinks that Apple has actually changed its exclusive revenue-sharing business model for Vodafone and ohers.

This post is a tricky one. Accountants are the guys who pay the bills at the end and can if they want make your life hell. So watch what you say about them. I'll try my best...

But what I always wanted to say is the following: What happens typically when accountants (controllers, CFOs etc.) run a tech company? Well I have not done a representative survey here on this exciting subject, but have had many first hand experiences, one just last week.

In all cases the discussions on what to do strategically are reduced to "how much does it cost?", "what does it bring in short-term?", "what is the inherent risk?" and "with what probability can you exactly prove that your assumptions are correct?", and - finally - "all in exact numbers, please". If you laugh now then don't do it because you feel it is exaggerated. I have seen this type of behavior in small startups (that is the worst of course), and also large corporations, many times in particular in Germanic societies. All of them have after some initial financial improvement failed in the marketplace since they did not go anywhere. In one case the CFO, who was the CEO, sold off many business units to get nice cash and show positive results but entirely missed investing into new markets. In the other case no decision on how to move aggressively in a fast paced market environment was ever taken until it was simply too late.

My clear experience is that accountants are good at what they are supposed to do (financials) and terrible at what they are not supposed to do: run a high-tech firm. If you want to know the names of the companies drop me a line, but don't give it to your accountant then please.