PJM Consulting

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Services
    • General Management Consulting
    • Interim Executive Management
    • Product Management & Marketing
    • SaaS Management Consulting
    • Business Development Services
    • Distribution Channels
    • Digital Marketing Services
    • Sales Management Consulting
  • Morettini On Management Blog
  • Resources
    • NEWS
    • Morettini on Management Videos
    • LINKS
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / B2C / Strategic Implications of the Google-Motorola Mobility Deal

By Phil Morettini 2 Comments

Strategic Implications of the Google-Motorola Mobility Deal

The big question is why is Google doing this? Media reports and analysis of the potential deal has been all over the map. Much speculation has centered on the real value being in the large Motorola patent portfolio, to help defend Android against lawsuits. There has been other commentary which points to the possibility of using the Motorola set top box business as an entrée for GoogleTV to finally penetrate the market. One pundit has even suggested that Google will eventually be giving away Motorola/Android handsets, in an effort to disrupt the marketplace and further drive mobile advertising revenue.

The only folks that really know are those inside Google, and they aren’t saying.

I’ve seen this called a “Bold” move–but it is Bold or a really bad idea? Let’s look the deal from several angles:

Deal Price

The price, $12.5B seems very rich to me for an also-ran commodity hardware maker, but I’ve of course not modeled it and done rigorous “what if” analysis like the quants at Google surely have. As mentioned above, a lot of the analysis of this deal has centered on Motorola’s 17,000 held and 7500 pending patents, supposedly to help defend Android against a recent spate of lawsuits. That’s a lot of patents, not doubt. But how many of them are actually relevant? A Motorola shareholder has recently filed suit on the basis of the deal being below fair value, so maybe my opinion on the deal price being rich is off base. Of course, anyone can file suit for anything.

Hardware vs. Software, Margins & Commoditization

This is the biggest issue to me. Google has a beautiful, high margin software business. In most cases, I am baffled when a successful software company wants to buy into or otherwise enter the hardware business, as I have written previously about Oracle. In addition to higher margins, software tends to commoditize much less quickly as well, as you can constantly tweak and go vertical with your applications to stay ahead of competitors. Motorola Mobility is in a high volume, hit-driven business which tends toward low margins pretty quickly. You can make money in this segment, but results tend to change quickly, and it really helps to be one of the big two or three market gorillas.

Android Licensees

Of all the negatives, this one baffles me the most. Google is positioning itself to compete with its customers–the Android licensees. I realize this is the age of “coopetiton” and all that. But from a strategic perspective, it’s far better NOT to compete with your customers and partners if you don’t have to. This strikes me as one of those times that it’s not really necessary. The Google pundits are spinning the story that Google can use all of those patents to defend the Android licensees against business-damaging lawsuits, so they’ve really done this FOR the licensees. Maybe this is true, but it sure smells like spin to me. I think that handset manufacturers will be much more careful about investing in Android-based systems going forward.

Apple vs. Microsoft

Google Android has been positioned as hardware-agnostic system software, which has allowed it to grow extremely fast and shoot past the Apple iPhone in volume. Think Microsoft Windows in PCs in the old days vs. the MacIntosh. Apple is the world’s darling now and Microsoft isn’t held in high regard like it used to be. Apple has always used a strategy of tightly coupling their software with only their own hardware. But Microsoft built a hugely profitable software business with 90% market share by following a software-only business model, centered on partnering with hardware vendors–and swamped Apple in the PC business. Of course, Apple has won big in some major categories recently with their favored approach. The final verdict for each of these two very divergent strategies isn’t yet clear in the smartphone segment.  How important is having the software and hardware under one umbrella in this particular market, versus the ability to propagate your technology more broadly with 3rd party hardware partners? We shall see.

Business Complexity

A software-only business is far simpler since you don’t have to deal with the complexities of hardware supply chains, obsolete equipment, and inventory forecasting. Because of this, it’s much easier to focus your resources on fewer key business drivers, and much easier to “turn the ship” when necessary. Google is getting to be a very large, complex business as it is. Adding hardware to the mix will only make it more complex, and harder to manage as a result.

What Does Google Really Do with Motorola Mobility?

I have seen a lot of speculation in this area, some of it ridiculous. As I stated earlier, One VC speculated that he expects Google to eventually give away free handsets to somehow drive advertising revenue. Although on the surface this seems to fit with the Google business model, it’s one of the silliest things I’ve heard, and a great way to lose money.  Google announced that they will run the acquisition as a separate subsidiary, implying somewhat of an arms length relationship. Like we bought it, but we’re really not going to pay that much attention to what they’re doing, let alone influence how the company is run. Right — I’ve got some really attractive swampland you might want to buy if you believe that one. They just paid $12.5B–fair price or not–it’s not exactly chump-change. I think they have some plans and will be actively involved. But what are those plans? That’s being held close to the vest–it will be interesting to see what unfolds.

There are a lot of different ways to look at this deal. So many angles to view it, and a lot of information about Google’s true intentions aren’t available to us. But remember, most acquisitions fail. My own feeling is that if the Motorola patents aren’t worth $12.5B, Google will regret this deal. And unintended market fallout could make them regret it even if the patents are that valuable. It would not surprise me to see Google jettison the hardware business in a couple of years.  I want to hear how you analyze this move, so post a comment to share your views on this deal and continue the discussion.

Follow Phil Morettini and Morettini on Management via Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, RSS, or the PJM Consulting Quarterly Newsletter. Contact Phil directly at info@pjmconsult.com

Filed Under: B2C, Business Models, Corporate Strategy, hardware, Mergers & Acquisitions, Software/Product Development Tagged With: Android, Apple, business model, Commodity, Google, hardware, high tech, management, margins, Microsoft, Motorola, Phil Morettini, PJM Consulting, SmartPhone, software, strategy

About Phil Morettini

Phil Morettini is the author of the Morettini on Management Tech Blog and President of PJM Consulting. Mr. Morettini has an extensive C-level software and hardware company executive background. PJM Consulting provides management consulting and interim management services to technology companies.

Comments

  1. admin says

    September 10, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    Marc, good to hear from you, thanks for posting your two cents. Hope all is well. -Phil

    Reply
  2. Marc Friedmann says

    September 10, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    Good thoughts, Phil. It may be that Google is watching Apple more than Microsoft. With Motorola Mobility, Google could be positioning to deliver integrated solutions of Android on phones and Chrome OS on tablets. In the last few years Apple has rapidly grown to >$100B, passing Microsoft’s $70B. With HP in deep confusion, the strategic timing could be good.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Article Categories

  • B2C
  • Business Development
  • Business Models
  • Corporate Strategy
  • Distribution Channels
  • enterprise software
  • Financing
  • General Management
  • hardware
  • Interim Executive Management
  • Marcom
  • market research
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • mid-market
  • Online Marketing
  • Operations
  • Pricing
  • Product Marketing/Management
  • Promotion
  • Retail
  • SaaS
  • sales
  • Social media
  • Software/Product Development
  • Startup/Early Stage
  • Uncategorized
  • VARs
  • Videos

Article Tags

B2B business model CEO channel channel sales consultant consulting consumer software Corporate Culture direct sales distribution distributor early stage Google growth hardware high tech internet M&A management market marketing Microsoft online Phil Morettini PJM Consulting product Product Development product management product marketing Promotion SaaS SaaS startup sales sales force seo software startup Startup Management strategy tech technology VAR VC Venture Capital

Article Archives

Company Profile

PJM Consulting
San Diego, CA 92130
(858)792-1062

Founded 2001
Management Consulting & Interim Executives for Software and Hardware Companies

Follow Us On Your Favorite Social Media

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • YouTube
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • RSS Feed

 

Privacy Policy

Subscribe to the Morettini on Management Newsletter, Hosted on LinkedIn:

© 2004-2022 PJM Consulting Some Rights Reserved