Broader Apple-Yahoo partnership viewed as logical step for both to fight Google

Posted:
in iPhone edited January 2014
Rumors of a growing alliance between Apple and Yahoo for delivering information to iPhone users have been met positively by one Wall Street analysts, who sees strong benefits for both parties in the relationship, particularly in combating Google.

Shaw Wu of Sterne Agee believes a strengthened partnership with Yahoo would help Apple lessen its dependence on Google, which has become a major rival thanks largely to its role in developing the Android mobile platform. Apple has already made an effort to push Google out from the iPhone by creating its own mapping solution, and removing YouTube as a default built-in iOS application.

Yahoo on iOS
Examples of Yahoo data on iOS.


The growing tension between Apple and Google has made Yahoo the "Switzerland of Internet companies," Wu said in a note to investors on Thursday. That's helped to make Yahoo an ideal partner for Apple as it looks for alternatives to Google.

The analyst cited various industry data, which has shown that Apple's iOS platform, which powers the iPhone and iPad, is the best for mobile monetization. This could become an issue for Google, as its ties with Apple are reduced and its presence on the iPhone becomes marginalized.

Wu noted that despite the fact that Android controls roughly 70 percent of the smartphone platform market share, iOS accounts for more mobile traffic ? 42 percent ? than Android's 31 percent presence. In addition, Apple's iOS accounts for 51 percent of mobile revenue, while Android takes just 30 percent.

As a result, as Apple finds new ways to push out Google in favor of Yahoo, the changes are likely to affect Google's ability to monetize Apple's iOS platform.

However, Wu noted that the reality is many Apple users love Google services, including Google Maps and YouTube ? two of the most popular applications available for iOS. As a result, he questioned whether Apple itself, Yahoo or someone else can provide superior content and services.

Wu is also particularly interested in the potential that Apple's voice-driven Siri provides, as it has the ability to simply bypass Google. The use of services like Wolfram Alpha and the elimination of Google Maps were found to have helped cut Siri's reliance on Google in half with the launch of iOS 6 late last year.

The new analysis from Wu was made in reaction to a report from earlier this week which claimed that Apple and Yahoo are in talks about ways to better integrate the search company's various services into iOS. Yahoo already provides data such as stock and weather information to Apple's native iOS applications.

Citing an unnamed source familiar with discussions, The Wall Street Journal reported that Apple is considering preloading data from Yahoo News and other Yahoo Web properties onto iOS devices. Most of the functionality is expected to be tied in to Siri, where Yahoo already provides sports scores on demand.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 40
    Lies, all lies. Anyone who says iOS makes more money, has more ad impressions, or has higher Internet usage when they have lower overall market share is lying. Maybe they should go back to grade school to learn that 70%>30%.
  • Reply 2 of 40
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    I see far more benefit in an Apple buyout of Yahoo! for the latter than the former… 


     


    That's code for "bump the stock up and make a hundred thousand before it collapses".


     




    Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

    Lies, all lies. Anyone who says iOS makes more money, has more ad impressions, or has higher Internet usage when they have lower overall market share is lying. Maybe they should go back to grade school to learn that 70%>30%.


     



    Cornflakes on a stick, man; use ¡, /s, or quotes! image

  • Reply 3 of 40
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    Maybe this alleged partnership can make Yahoo relevant again.
  • Reply 4 of 40
    ^ Got it. I should dumb down my posts for people who don't get the obvious. :)
  • Reply 5 of 40


    What is the meaning of this sentence?  


     


     


    Quote:


    Switzerland of Internet companies,


  • Reply 6 of 40


    Why can't Yahoo! be acquired by Apple?  Its nice to see them together as a unit.  


    Also, wow, Marissa talking in WWDC after  Tim.  Nice view.  The stage becomes sooo beautiful.

  • Reply 7 of 40
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    chandra69 wrote: »
    What is the meaning of this sentence?  


    The Swiss are neutral.
    chandra69 wrote: »
    Why can't Yahoo! be acquired by Apple?  Its nice to see them together as a unit.  
    Also, wow, Marissa talking in WWDC after  Tim.  Nice view.  The stage becomes sooo beautiful.

    I don't think it'll be wise for Apple to buy them.
  • Reply 8 of 40
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

    What is the meaning of this sentence?  


     


    The implication is that Yahoo! has become "neutral ground" between Apple and Google's endeavors. Switzerland has historically remained neutral in European conflict for centuries, and such has served as a respite from war for a similar amount of time.


     


    Not sure how valuable a respite Yahoo! is supposed to be, but that's not the consideration of the phrase. image

  • Reply 9 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    The implication is that Yahoo! has become "neutral ground" between Apple and Google's endeavors. Switzerland has historically remained neutral in European conflict for centuries, and such has served as a respite from war for a similar amount of time.


     


    Not sure how valuable a respite Yahoo! is supposed to be, but that's not the consideration of the phrase. image



    Correct. I don't think Yahoo sees themselves as battling Google.


    http://www.informationweek.com/internet/google/yahoo-revives-ad-partnership-with-google/240148105

  • Reply 10 of 40


    This might tick off a few here, but I am beginning to wonder about this 'Apple v. Google' meme, and whether there isn't some serious hyperventilation going on.


     


    Leaving aside issues of Eric Schmidt's board duplicities, Larry Page's sophomoric comments, and an occasional kerfuffle over apps that were not submitted, etc., are Apple and Google really that major a pair of competitors to each other? Implicit in these arguments is the notion that, somehow, for Apple to win Google has to lose (and vice versa). Really?


     


    One, 97% of Google's revenue (and pretty much the same in operating profits) comes from search. Apple does nothing there, and arguably, has no business there. It's not Apple's core competency. Leave it to others who can do a better job. Apple need not, cannot, should not do everything.


     


    Two, yes, Android v. iOS is a real battle. Board secrets or not, something like this was eventually bound to happen. (If not Google, it might have been Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung, Nokia, Palm, HTC..... take your pick. We have no idea, and there is no way to prove or disprove a counterfactual.) As I see it, from a cash flow standpoint, Android is as much an internecine battle among Androids as well as between Android and non-iOS platforms, as it is between Android and iOS. Google makes very little from it, with most of what they likely make from mobile being from iOS (no doubt to their embarrassment).


     


    Indeed, it's probably getting to the point where Android may be running away from Google's ability to rein it in (witness Facebook, HTC, Samsung, Amazon's recent hardware/software offerings). I'll bet there's a lot of head-scratching going on at Google about these developments, and how to address it (that may explain why Rubin was let go from Android).


     


    Three, yes, Google is trying to get into hardware, the high-end of which is Apple's domain. However, they are far from succeeding with it, and arguably, may never succeed, given all the new skills and competencies that are required to make a hardware business work well. Even if they succeed, I think Google's hardware will be a far greater -- and more immediate -- threat to non-iOS, on-Mac OS hardware. Do people seriously believe that the Nexus, Chrome Pixel, etc. are serious threats to Apple?


     


    Four, none of Google's vaunted, well-publicized future hardware -- Google Glass, self-driving vehicles, etc -- compete with Apple in any way. Apple has its own future hardware plans that, I'll bet, have little to with such far-fetched (and perhaps silly, low-volume) initiatives.


     


    Five, the software competition from Google -- Docs, Mail, Chrome, Maps, Google Play, music/media store, social networking, even Maps -- are all in areas that are either given away by, or at worst, incredibly low-margin, for Apple. Apple needs those things as part of its ecosystem to continue to support and strengthen its hardware profits. If it is trumped -- as it will be -- in some of those areas, what's the bid deal, as long as Apple is able to incorporate the winning software into its ecosystem?


     


    Bottom line: I am beginning to tire of the "A versus G" fulminations.

  • Reply 11 of 40
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    Arguably, the best move is for Apple to take a stake in Yahoo!

    I suspect that Apple and Yahoo! have considerable overlapping demographics. In which case, the acquisition of Yahoo! may not be fiscally responsible.

    An investment by Apple would further infuse Yahoo! with resources to improve services.
  • Reply 12 of 40
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    Lies, all lies. Anyone who says iOS makes more money, has more ad impressions, or has higher Internet usage when they have lower overall market share is lying. Maybe they should go back to grade school to learn that 70%>30%.

    I thought this was a serious post until I considered that:
    • I haven't blocked you
    • I realized you have hundreds of posts
    • I thought about your previous posts

    The problem is that we have many members who think exactly as you depicted in your post.
    (I am certain they will show themselves forthwith.)
  • Reply 13 of 40

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Correct. I don't think Yahoo sees themselves as battling Google.


    http://www.informationweek.com/internet/google/yahoo-revives-ad-partnership-with-google/240148105



    Yahoo may not be battling with Google. But Apple can use Yahoo! service to battle (a little) with Google. Or, am I missing something?

  • Reply 14 of 40
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    This might tick off a few here, but I am beginning to wonder about this 'Apple v. Google' meme, and whether there isn't some serious hyperventilation going on.

    Leaving aside issues of Eric Schmidt's board duplicities, Larry Page's sophomoric comments, and an occasional kerfuffle over apps that were not submitted, etc., are Apple and Google really that major a pair of competitors to each other? Implicit in these arguments is the notion that, somehow, for Apple to win Google has to lose (and vice versa). Really?

    One, 97% of Google's revenue (and pretty much the same in operating profits) comes from search. Apple does nothing there, and arguably, has no business there. It's not Apple's core competency. Leave it to others who can do a better job. Apple need not, cannot, should not do everything.

    Two, yes, Android v. iOS is a real battle. Board secrets or not, something like this was eventually bound to happen. (If not Google, it might have been Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung, Nokia, Palm, HTC..... take your pick. We have no idea, and there is no way to prove or disprove a counterfactual.) As I see it, from a cash flow standpoint, Android is as much an internecine battle among Androids as well as between Android and non-iOS platforms, as it is between Android and iOS. Google makes very little from it, with most of what they likely make from mobile being from iOS (no doubt to their embarrassment).

    Indeed, it's probably getting to the point where Android may be running away from Google's ability to rein it in (witness Facebook, HTC, Samsung, Amazon's recent hardware/software offerings). I'll bet there's a lot of head-scratching going on at Google about these developments, and how to address it (that may explain why Rubin was let go from Android).

    Three, yes, Google is trying to get into hardware, the high-end of which is Apple's domain. However, they are far from succeeding with it, and arguably, may never succeed, given all the new skills and competencies that are required to make a hardware business work well. Even if they succeed, I think Google's hardware will be a far greater -- and more immediate -- threat to non-iOS, on-Mac OS hardware. Do people seriously believe that the Nexus, Chrome Pixel, etc. are serious threats to Apple?

    Four, none of Google's vaunted, well-publicized future hardware -- Google Glass, self-driving vehicles, etc -- compete with Apple in any way. Apple has its own future hardware plans that, I'll bet, have little to with such far-fetched (and perhaps silly, low-volume) initiatives.

    Five, the software competition from Google -- Docs, Mail, Chrome, Maps, Google Play, music/media store, social networking, even Maps -- are all in areas that are either given away by, or at worst, incredibly low-margin, for Apple. Apple needs those things as part of its ecosystem to continue to support and strengthen its hardware profits. If it is trumped -- as it will be -- in some of those areas, what's the bid deal, as long as Apple is able to incorporate the winning software into its ecosystem?

    Bottom line: I am beginning to tire of the "A versus G" fulminations.

    The problem is that this fails to recognize Google's role as "Death [Shiva], the destroyer of worlds."

    Google's revenue is from advertising not search. Search is a feature, a function, which generates no revenue of itself. As a result, Google is motivated to develop new markets and monetize said markets with advertising. Expanding the advertising business into non-traditional markets is an interesting and perhaps even admirable goal but stealing the works of others to do so is not.

    Stealing copyrighted works to expand an advertising empire without compensating the originator questionable at best.
  • Reply 15 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post



    Stealing copyrighted works to expand an advertising empire without compensating the originator questionable at best.


    Are you claiming Google did that, or just throwing in some words to hope others read it that way?

  • Reply 16 of 40
    ifij775ifij775 Posts: 470member


    Does Apple offer real-time stock quotes, yet? Delayed quotes is amateur hour.

  • Reply 17 of 40
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,482member
    ^ Got it. I should dumb down my posts for people who don't get the obvious. :)

    Exactly. Tis the Internet after all.
  • Reply 18 of 40

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post



    The problem is that this fails to recognize Google's role as "Death [Shiva], the destroyer of worlds."



    Google's revenue is from advertising not search. Search is a feature, a function, which generates no revenue of itself. As a result, Google is motivated to develop new markets and monetize said markets with advertising. Expanding the advertising business into non-traditional markets is an interesting and perhaps even admirable goal but stealing the works of others to do so is not.



    Stealing copyrighted works to expand an advertising empire without compensating the originator questionable at best.


     


    1) There is no advertising revenue for Google without search.


     


    2) What does "stealing copyrighted works" have to do with Apple?


     


    3) You know diddley-squat about Shiva. Don't go there.

  • Reply 19 of 40
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    1) There is no advertising revenue for Google without search.

    2) What does "stealing copyrighted works" have to do with Apple?

    3) You know diddley-squat about Shiva. Don't go there.

    1. No. Search is simply one means at Google's disposal to monetize advertising. Read Google's annual reports.

    2. Really?

    3. Irrelevant. You don't know diddly-squat about 20th century history.
  • Reply 20 of 40


    Wasn't Apple working with Yahoo back in the day?  I seem to remember an Apple home page that was populated with Yahoo content.  Before that I believe my home page was powered by Excite.

Sign In or Register to comment.