“The purchase follows days of speculation that Apple would scoop up Waltham, Mass.-based Quattro for roughly $275 million in a bid to go head-to-head against Google, which is in the process of acquiring Quattro rival AdMob to the tune of $750 million,” Hickey reports.
“Apple’s Quattro acquisition and Google’s AdMob buy illustrate that the companies are looking beyond standard hardware, software and applications for mobile dominance,” Hickey reports. “The ability to sell ads on the iPhone will make Apple’s smartphone and mobility business that much more lucrative. And with rumors still lingering about a possible Apple Tablet, it is certain Apple has ad sales in its eyes there too.”
Hickey reports, “For Google, the ability to sell mobile advertisements is another feather in its cap as it continues the uphill battle of competing with Apple on the smartphone and mobility battlefield.”
Full article here.
A year or two ago we all thought the big battle would be between Apple and Microsoft for world dominance. Now Microsoft is on the sidelines slowing fading away and yelling:
Hey, what about me!
Why does someone have to be “dominant.” Dominant means we, the consumers, lose. Always.
AdMob is so far ahead of Quattro that it would seem Quattro is doing well to look like solid competition rather than the guys about to get run out of town. With Apple behind them, and – likely – a bundled position on the iPhone now set, they can be seen as much stronger. Maybe not the segment-winner, but an unquestioned competitor. A solid, survivable #2 rather than an also-ran.
Maybe Apple will run ads on the iSlate in order to stream TV shows and on demand movies to support the cost demanded by the owners of the media. No one is talking about the BILLION dollar server farm that Apple is (or has) built. Could be that Apple needed to finish the server farm in order to supply media to the iSlate.
<b>”For Google, the ability to sell mobile advertisements is another feather in its cap as it continues the uphill battle of competing with Apple on the smartphone and mobility battlefield.”
Wow. More like, as it <strike>continues</strike> begins the uphill battle. Nothing like keeping things in perspective.
Advertisers, publishers, and developers will weigh the merits of both platforms and eventually decide, if Google makes a name for itself in the mobile space, we’ll consider porting our products over to them.
In the meantime, Apple’s advertising approach is vaporware, a yet unrealized source of revenue and we’ll be the judge of whether its working or not.
If Apple’s design philosophy can exist with the advertising meme, in harmony, fine. Otherwise I will wait patiently for a third-party to develop a product to block the advertising.
DL
“AdMob is so far ahead of Quattro…”
By whose account? I never heard of either of them until they came off the shopping block.
I am impressed with the Q’s list of clients and they have a dream-team of marketers.
I was thinking AdMob’s approach is more scientific and “computerized”, and consigned to measuring market forces and not really helping content providers to make an impression.
I mean after you’ve acquired your target with AdMob’s scientific razzle-dazzle, you still have to make an appeal to the consumer, and that is The Q’s forte.
There is more at stake here than simply putting ads on the the iPhone.
Apple’s holistic approach to this aspect of marketing will be, like all things Apple, done with class. Call it what you want but Apple had to settle for The Q, because AdMob has an inflated sense of worth.
Apple walked away from the deal because Oppenheimer said it’s not worth it. I have no doubt whatsoever, Apple could have acquired AdMob at any price, but come Monday morning in the boardroom, it would have been so awkward when AdMob’s brain trust met with Apple’s.
“I can’t believe we paid that much for them.” is no way to begin a relationship.
I suspect that the acquisition of Quattro has been in the works for quite some time, well before any public announcement of the Google-AdMob deal. After all, Apple closed on this deal already while Google’s is still pending.
Apple may have known about the Google deal prior to initiating their own acquisition. But the lame attempts to paint this as an Apple me-too effort are pathetic, IMO. This is a smart, low-risk, high potential upside move by Apple that fits right in with their long term strategy. That is because Apple actually *has* a coordinated long term strategy, unlike some other tech companies.
Looks like Apple and Google, once partners to spy on each other, are now putting Microsoft into a market riptide. If Microsoft does not swim out of it, it just might take it into the deep blue, ok- some bad reference to the blue screen of death, where they will be forever a rounding error in mobility.
But, like I really care! Loss to much data from the bozo’s to have even an atom of compassion!
Unless one is vastly superior to the other,
it looks like Apple just saved half a billion dollars achieving its goals.
Me thinks Apple bought it to prevent Gargle from dominating the ad market.
@Macguy
You’re right in every respect, but people will draw their own conclusions about what Apple is up to.
Google created its ad marketing strategy using, and for, the computer platform, and just like Microsoft they are dependent on computer manufacturing for growth. When the manufacturers sneeze, Microsoft and Google catches a cold.
Microsoft, and now Google, both have their own hardware platform from which to offer their services, something which Apple achieved 34-years, 9-months, and 5 days ago, and counting.
The big difference between them is, Apple and Google excelled because their main focus was the consumer experience. They left out the middle-man.
Because Microsoft filtered everything they made through a third-party, i.e., the computer guys, they became codependent on an industry that was at war with itself. While they were playing Last Man Standing, Microsoft became distracted by potential competitors and turned predator.
Hence, Microsoft is evil.
Google Search began life with a plain plain vanilla veneer and just got better by soliciting input from the end user.
Microsoft loves Rocky Road.
Nothing is plain or simple to them and that attitude appeals to their consumers who take their work seriously. Computing is challenge for them, to bend the machine to their will, to extract every ounce of performance from their tools, goes to the very heart of their credibility, and who they are as an employee. Tools matter.
There is a caveat though, if you build the machine yourself, then you are a cut above your peers, and everything else is child’s play. This individual probably believes in his soul that his computer creation, coupled with his thirst for knowledge will unlock the secrets of the universe.
That’s why PC users wear tin hats and Apple users wear beanies. One is avoiding Mother Nature, the other has embraced her. One has no love interest, other than the vision of themselves, and the other always has time for Mother Nature.
Going into this, both Google and Apple are developing their own spheres of influence in the mobile space and forsaking the desktop, for richer rewards. If Microsoft doesn’t hurry that door will close and they will have left a massive audience behind who has one eye on the door and the other in the mirror.
Go
@ Macguy: “Me thinks Apple bought it to prevent Gargle from dominating the ad market”
I think it is more than just that. There are laws (weak as they may be) that prevent one company from trying to take over an entire market. Google is already being questioned over its acquisition of AdMob.
I think Apple has been watching these ad brokers get rich off their iPhone platform and they feel that if they’re covering the cost for the distribution of these free ad-based applications, they should at least be able to recoup some of that money.