It’s almost Orwellian the way wheel turns on these things. This is war by blog post. Skype, one-time disruptive force in the global telecommunications industry, practically the inventor of the peer-to-peer voice over IP  business, is being accused of ditching its openness principles and using its market power to try and disrupt the business of an upcoming rival, that’s according to VoIP player Fring (the upcoming rival) through a blog post.

The problem which sparked the spat lay with Fring’s video chat client, freshly approved for the latest iPhone (the one with the back-facing camera). That resulted in lots of downloads, lots of use and apparently a load-spike on Skype (and Skype’s carrier partners’ networks) with which Fring has open interconnect.  If you’re on Fring you can (could!) call Skype and vice versa  -  that’s all part of the VoIP game.

The big difference between Skype and Fring though, is that Skype’s video calling doesn’t involve the mobile data channel, but must be made on WiFi. Fring’s offering is 3G based (and the company is still slightly stunned that Apple and it’s network partner for the iPhone, AT&T, passed the app).
As a result of all the client downloads from the Appstore a Skype-spike occurred which lead Skype to cut Fring users off (according to Fring). This was deemed outrageous by Fring whose leading lights got emotional about the whole thing and ended up blogging that Skype were cowards and were going against openness principles.

Skype, sounding coldly restrained and a tad incumbent-like, said in its blog that this was all overwrought and untrue.  It had taken action to protect its brand and its own customers because Fring’s app was using Skype in a way it wasn’t supposed to be used.

That last sentence sounds SO like the sort of language used just a few years ago by network operators trying to block Skype, an irony not lost on Fring’s management – hence the bile.
We spoke to with Fring’s VP of Marketing, Jake Levant (there’s a request out to Skype too, but so far no comment. We’ll update the story if and when it comes).

According to Levant it’s all a bit of a shame and it will be the users of both services who are going to suffer from legal battles. “The thing that burns about this is that we’re pushing freedom here, we’re changing the world and the people that are going to get hurt by a legal battle are the users,” he says.

So can the business relationship be resumed between Fring and Skype, or is this a schism that can’t be mended? “We will be thrilled to reconnect,” says Levant, but he makes clear it has to be on an ‘open basis “We have nine other relationships  with other networks, too.”

The company that comes out of the saga best is Apple, says Levant, that doyen of openness (not) which enabled the whole thing by passing the Fring app for download in the iPhone appstore. That was “a gutsy move,” says Levant, “because they have a video product called ‘Facetime’ and our product is clearly a competitor.” But then maybe Apple is wary about who it blocks and who it doesn’t.  It wasn’t that long ago that it got into deep trouble with the authorities by not passing another VoIP app – developed, of course, by Skype.

The startup found that more than half of mobile apps are priced below or equal to $2 in Android Market, Apple’s App Store for iPhone and iPad, Nokia’s Ovi Store and Palm’s App Catalog.

The exceptions to the rule: BlackBerry App World (which doesn’t allow apps priced below $2.99) and Windows Marketplace for Mobile.

The latter also boasts the smallest share of free applications for all stores researched (22% to be exact), and notably, five out of the ten most popular free apps in Windows Marketplace for Mobile are actually published by Microsoft.

Android Market sticks out with a 57% share of free applications, way more than what the other stores average. Most of them clearly circle around 25% free vs 75% paid, according to Distimo’s research findings. In fact, the only other app store with a share of free apps larger than 1/3 is Palm’s App Catalog.

Distimo points out that while Android Market is available in some 46 countries, users in only 13 of those are able to download paid apps, while developers from only 9 countries can distribute them in Android Market (much to the dismay of developers and users around the world).

(You may notice the sum of the proportion between free and paid apps for some stores exceeds 100%, which is due to apps switching pricing models during the reporting period.)

As mentioned earlier, Distimo found that more than 50% of apps get priced below or equal to $2.00 in most stores. Zooming in on the different App Store versions, Distimo’s research shows that the percentage of applications priced $0.99 ($0 – $1) is much higher in the App Store for iPhone than in the App Store for iPad.

The percentage of applications priced $1.99 ($1 – $2) is similar between these two stores, while the percentage of applications priced higher than $3.00 and below or equal to $10.00 is higher in the Apple App Store for iPad than in the Apple App Store for iPhone.

The average price of all paid applications and the 100 most popular paid applications in the Apple App Store for iPad ($4.65) is higher than in the Apple App Store for iPhone ($4.01). However, the average price of the 100 top grossing applications is higher on the Apple App Store for iPhone.

The Google empire contains a diverse array of online services and moving parts. Despite the outward appearance that Google is primarily an online search engine, the fuel that drives the search engine and funds the Google empire is advertising. That explains why Google was so aggressive in outbidding Apple to acquire AdMob for $750 million.

Had Apple sat idly by, there is a very good chance that the AdMob deal would have been blocked by the FTC out of fear that it gives Google too much of an advantage in the mobile advertising market. Instead, Apple acquired Quattro for $275 million–less than half of what it had bid for AdMob. That purchase led to the iAd mobile advertising platform, announced in April at Apple’s iPhone OS 4.0 launch event.

In its statement announcing approval of the AdMob purchase, the FTC explains “The Commission has reason to believe that Apple quickly will become a strong mobile advertising network competitor. Apple not only has extensive relationships with application developers and users, but also is able to offer targeted ads (heretofore a strength of AdMob) by leveraging proprietary user data gleaned from users of Apple mobile devices.”

The FTC statement goes on to add “As a result of Apple’s entry, AdMob’s success to date on the iPhone platform is unlikely to be an accurate predictor of AdMob’s competitive significance going forward, whether AdMob is owned by Google or not. This is particularly important given that AdMob’s revenue and market share are derived largely from the iPhone platform.”

Now, the race begins in yet another facet of the increasingly heated rivalry between Google and Apple–formerly strong allies united against Microsoft. Apple’s iPhone OS and Google’s Android OS are battling each other in the smartphone arena, and now Apple and Google will also be fight for the ad revenue generated on those mobile platforms.

Susan Wojcicki, Vice President of Product Management for Google, declared in a blog post “It’s clear that mobile advertising is growing incredibly fast with lots of businesses innovating at great speed. Every day, more marketers are looking to take advantage of the mobile-specific capabilities, extended reach, great returns and value that mobile advertising provides. Advertisers are now starting to see mobile as an essential part of their overall campaigns, not just a silo-ed experiment on the side.”

Google will include click-to-call functionality with its mobile ads. This feature enables advertisers to include a phone number directly in the ad text that users can simply click to contact the business directly via phone. The convenience and efficiency of not having to remember the number and switch modes from Web surfing to phone function in order to dial it will be appreciated by users and lead to more customer engagement for advertisers.

For Apple’s part, it hopes to help developers monetize apps without the user having to leave the app to see the ad. “iAd, Apple’s new mobile advertising platform, combines the emotion of TV ads with the interactivity of web ads. Today, when users click on mobile ads they are almost always taken out of their app to a web browser, which loads the advertiser’s webpage. Users must then navigate back to their app, and it is often difficult or impossible to return to exactly where they left.”

Each mobile advertising platform will offer unique features and strategic advantages, but the real competition may simply come down to money. Apple is structuring iAd with a revenue sharing model that pays 60 percent of ad revenue to the developer. Google recently unveiled that it shares as much as 68 percent of ad revenue with the Web sites it places ads on.

The battle between Google and Apple, between the Android and iPhone smartphone platforms, and between Google’s mobile advertising with AdMob and Apple iAd, could be a huge benefit to advertisers. There will be more choices and the two will have to compete on both price and innovation.

Want to monitize your (mobile) traffic? Please contact us @ Sendvideotomobile.com and find out more.

A report by market research company NPD Group, found the Android OS – developed by Google – ended the first quarter of 2010 with a US domestic market share of 28 per cent.

That’s up from about 20 per cent in the December quarter, and due mostly to strong sales of handsets such as the Droid and Droid Eris at Verizon Wireless, according to the report.

The iPhone saw its US share remain relatively flat at 21 per cent.

The leader in the US remains Research In Motion, whose BlackBerry family of “smart phone” devices has about 36 per cent of the market, according to NPD data.

A big part of the boost for the Android platform came from the launch of the Droid handset from Motorola in late 2009.

The device racked up strong sales and helped the platform’s market share surge from below five per cent in the third quarter to end the year around 20 per cent, according to NPD data.

Verizon is expected to put heavy promotion behind the latest Android device – the Droid Incredible from HTC – for the next several months.

The data may also indicate pressure on Apple to expand its base of carriers for the iPhone.

The device is still exclusive to AT&T in the US market, despite persistent speculation that it might expand to Verizon later this year.

The company has never commented on any of these rumors.

Research in Motion built an enviable $38-billion franchise over the past 20 years without resorting to a single major takeover.

But in the unforgiving tech sector, no one can rest on their laurels. As RIM fights a losing battle with Apple for market share, and contemplates Microsoft’s planned push into smart phones, there’s a school of thought that says the Blackberry maker must break with its conservative past, and make a $1-billion bid for troubled rival Palm.

After 11 straight quarters of red ink and a steady loss of relevance, there are numerous reports that Palm is more than willing to listen to takeover offers. When this chatter began, Asian tech plays HTC Corp. and Lenovo Group were mentioned as the likely buyers – two investment bankers are alleged to have been hired to run an auction. Yesterday, sources at global investment banks said the only potential bidder to show serious interest in Palm was RIM.

The logic for taking out Palm goes like this: RIM is plagued by software bugs in its operating system, and needs to broaden the range of products its offer to consumer and business clients. Critics say the Blackberry needs to feature more applications and better video capabilities to keep pace with iPhone and other gadgets.

Buying Palm, according to some tech experts, would bring a superior software platform known as WebOS under the Research In Motion roof, and better position the Canadian company with clients as it rolls out the next generation of mobile devices.

Financially, RIM could take out Palm without blinking. The Waterloo, Ont.-based company holds $1.6-billion (U.S.) in cash and no debt. Palm’s market capitalization is just $823-million. Financiers and analysts who deal with both companies say the cultures have much in common, though obviously RIM would roll the roost.

Elevation Partners, the Bono-backed private equity firm that’s made a massive bet on Palm, is seen by analysts as a willing seller of this stock if it can get anything near its estimated purchase price of $6 a share. Yesterday on Nasdaq, Palm closed at $4.82 a share.

But do RIM’s brass feel the need to do a deal?

RIM staged its annual investor conference yesterday, and if co-CEO Jim Ballsillie was feeling vulnerable, he sure didn’t show it to the Street.

RIM’s message to investors and analysts was simple: Blackberry will be upgraded to ensure telecom companies of all stripes had a superior product to offer clients, in a world where bandwidth is at a premium. Genuity Capital Markets analyst Deepak Chopra took in the show and said in a note to clients: “If anything, it appears RIM is doubling down on its historical strategy that the carriers are important and will remain important.”

Mr. Ballsillie, never lacking for confidence, did “appear to acknowledge the gap between RIM and other platforms on quantity of applications” said Mr. Chopka, a shortfall that the analyst said Mr. Ballsillie traced to a “focus on quality.”

If RIM is about to announce a transformational deal with Palm, it would be logical for Mr. Ballsillie and his colleagues to set the table with investors at yesterday’s briefing. The co-CEO might point out a few chinks in Blackberry’s armour, and explain how these flaws will soon be fixed to better take the fight to Apple.

No such weakness was revealed. In fact, there were tech analysts in the crown yesterday who came away from Mr. Ballsillie’s presentation thinking any talk of a Palm deal is nonsense. One RIM watcher, whose company does not allow him to be named, pointed out that the Canadian purchased a perfectly decent operating system for future devices in early April for an estimated $200-million, when it bought a small player named QNX Software.

Mr. Ballsillie deserves all sorts of credit for transforming a tech start up, with just one wireless product, into a global market leader. (Why this deft strategic touch deserts the RIM veteran when it comes to buying hockey teams remains a mystery.) Judging from the bravado on display at yesterday’s investor conference, RIM’s co-CEO can think of better uses for a $1-billion than buying Palm.

But if Mr. Ballsillie and the RIM board see buying a once powerful, now humbled rival as the best way to expand their enviable position as a supplier of deeply addictive wireless devices, then there’s little in the way of doing a deal for Palm.

Source: Globe Investor Blog (2010)

The soccer world cup in South Africa in 2010 will see a massive explosion in the availability and adoption of mobile content and applications throughout Africa as consumers use every channel at their disposal to stay in touch with news about the tournament.

That’s the word from Ayodale Cole, founder and CEO of Cole Solutions LLC, an American mobile content and applications provider that has targeted SA for its services and products. He said that with a major handset manufacturer and a global mobile operator among the flagship sponsors for the tournament, 2010 is likely to be a showcase for mobile content and applications.

User-generated content, text and multimedia messaging-based news services, advergaming, mobile television, video clips and mobile web portals are just some of the content and application services expected to proliferate during the World Cup, Cole added.

The German world cup in 2006 gives just a taste of what we can expect for 2010. According to Fifa, it enjoyed more than 73 million page views on its mobile web portal after Fifaworldcup.com went mobile for the first time. And millions of European consumers accessed Fifa World Cup Soccer mobile content, according to research by Telephia.

Telephia’s research showed that 6% of Italian mobile subscribers, 4% and 3% of French, Swedish and British subscribers accessed World Cup content on their mobile devices. Global mobile operator, 3, alone had 740,000 users a week viewing World Cup clips. It offered video previews of every match, video clips of match highlights, SMS text alerts and a football talkshow.

Cole said, “At the time that the German World Cup took place, mobile content and applications was only a fledgling market. Since then, the industry has matured and consumers have higher expectations from mobile content providers. To compete, content providers will need to offer rich, high-quality content to subscribers.”

Cole pointed out that the African market, particularly South Africa, has massive cellular penetration and a large population of users already making use of mobile content and applications. For example, the South Africa Soccer-Laduma publication reportedly has three times as many unique users on its .mobi portal as on its traditional website.

With about 40 million mobile subscribers in South Africa and only about five million Internet users, there will be a massive demand for mobile world cup information and content, said Cole. There will also be a massive market among foreign tourists who arrive in South Africa with a mobile phone in hand. Fixture and match information by text messaging or on the mobile Web, multimedia clips, advergames, and social networking applications are all likely to be extremely popular.

One recent report from US-based research group, JBB, showed that the 2010 soccer world cup could give the mobile advertising industry in South Africa a huge boost. It said that the World Cup will spur on emergence of new advanced mobile user-generated services featuring advanced streaming video, mobile advertising, location aware, and social networking capabilities in particular.

Said Cole: “It’s important to remember that sports events are social events, and soccer fans will want to share information and opinions with their friends. Many South African football fans have no access to PCs, and most will be watching the big games at pubs, stadiums and other social venues with cellphones in their pockets.”

Cole said that technology has matured since World Cup 2006. Many more people in South Africa are now carrying smartphones with advanced Internet features, and the country has excellent EDGE, 3G and HSDPA coverage in its metropolitan areas. That means there are some strong opportunities for mobile content developers to add value.

However, it is important to remember that people’s expectations from mobile content are rising – they want rich up-to-the-minute content, commentary and rich media, Cole added.

“Time is running out for content providers to think about which services and content they will provide to their audiences, and for marketers to think about how they will exploit mobile opportunities from 2010,” he concluded.

“There is every sign that rich and pervasive mobile content will be one of the defining features of this tournament.”

- itnewsafrica.com

Opera has a very tiny market share in desktop browsers, but it is actually a profitable company, traded on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Its desktop browser is free but it makes money by licensing mobile versions of its browser for phone makers.

This business will soon be toast, however, as the market switches from so-called “feature phones” with specific browsers that makers will pay licenses for, to smartphones whose OSes come with their own browsers, such as the iPhone.

So Opera needs to evolve its business model, and apparently they’ve chosen to go the mobile advertising route — first by acquiring a mobile ad company and now launching an ad platform for the iPad.

Google, the world’s No.1 Internet search engine with $23.7 billion in 2009 revenue, has stepped up its mobile efforts as consumers increasingly access the Web from smartphones like Apple Inc’s iPhone. Google offers its own Android operating system that handset manufacturers like Motorola Inc and HTC use in their devices, and in January, Google began selling the Nexus One phone directly on its Web site. In November, Google announced plans to acquire mobile advertising firm AdMob for $750 million, though the deal is currently facing regulatory review. The mobile briefing comes as Google is in a standoff with China, the world’s largest Internet market by users, over the future of its Internet search website in the country. Google has said it will no longer censor search results in China, a move that some analysts believe could mean the end of its Chinese language web site Google.cn. Asked what the search situation might mean for Google’s mobile plans in China, Google CFO Patrick Pichette said on the webcast on Monday that Android was an “open source” platform that’s available to everybody and that the company thought China represented “another great market in which Android should flourish.”

Interested in sending (advertisement) videos to mobile phones or starting a banner campaign? Please contact us @ SendVideoToMobile.com

Google Engineering Vice President Vic Gundotra predicted that the rates companies pay for search ads on mobile phones would overtake rates they pay on the desktop because of the growing popularity and adoption of so-called smart phones that deliver a better browsing experience and simpler data plans.

“Google has bet big on mobile,” Gundotra said. Google is not just making “mini versions” of desktop applications but is rethinking applications and delivering new ones, he said.

In recent years, Google has seen mobile advertising rates increase dramatically, Gundotra  said. The number of Google searches on mobile phones has increased fivefold in the last two years. He also noted that GPS and other features that broadcast a user’s whereabouts are helping Google create more relevant online ads.

The briefing came as Google awaits the outcome of a regulatory review of its proposed acquisition of mobile advertising firm AdMob. Google originally said it planned to buy the firm in November.

“We continue to be impressed with AdMob,” Gundotra said.

Making the leap from desktop to phone is crucial for the Internet giant, which dominates search advertising. The era of mobile advertising has arrived, Gundotra said.“The industry trends are blowing in Google’s favor,” he said.

CEO Eric Schmidt has already declared that Google is a “mobile first” company.

IDC analyst Karsten Weide estimates that, combined, Google and AdMob have 21% market share of mobile advertising. But he downplayed the significance of that lead.

“Google is the single most overestimated company in the industry,” Weide said. “So far it’s still a one-trick pony. Mobile is so new and so volatile. That does not mean that Google is going to be the ruler of the mobile universe.”

In one of our earlier post, we introduced our Subscription Services as an extra tool to increase revenues. These optional services will allow your customers to subscribe to your own video portal website or TV station platform.  The advantage is, that a customer is not simple lost after an one off purchase but retained and so generating more and more added value for the website.

This unique service comes as a free add-on and will greatly increase the performance of the Send Video To Mobile button.

As of now, we are live in more 14 countries with Belgium expected to follow in the month of January. From here our goal is to continue expanding until we have a global coverage, much like we already have for our Standard Services.

Interested to know what the Standard or Subscription based services can do for your site? Just visit our website: www.sendvideotomobile.com or write to support for some personal advice.