MacLive Expo hits London

Filed under: Other Events, TUAW Business, Apple"A Mac Expo. In London?" I hear our American readers cry. Yes, it's true. There's Mac shows this side of the pond too, didn't you know. As it happens, TUAW will be paying a visit to the MacLive Expo London which runs from October 25th - tomorrow - through til Saturday October 27th. Coinciding with the launch of Leopard (how convenient) there's a plethora of seminars, hands-on sessions, theatres and the show floor itself to enjoy.If you're paying...

Filed under: Other Events, TUAW Business, Apple"A Mac Expo. In London?" I hear our American readers cry. Yes, it's true. There's Mac shows this side of the pond too, didn't you know. As it happens, TUAW will be paying a visit to the MacLive Expo London which runs from October 25th - tomorrow - through til Saturday October 27th. Coinciding with the launch of Leopard (how convenient) there's a plethora of seminars, hands-on sessions, theatres and the show floor itself to enjoy.If you're paying the Expo a visit on Friday, it might be worth noting that instead of competing with rush-hour London (not to mention an indubitable crowd at the Regent Street Apple Store), you can pick up a copy of Leopard at the show. Organisers have chosen to extend the show's hours until 6.30pm (Friday only) to allow visitors to pick the new OS from resellers who will be on the show floor.The MacLive Expo is being held at the National Hall, Kensington Olympia, London. See you there!Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • The live music talk

    As promised, I've put together a PDF transcript of the talk I did about the music industry. (click to get the PDF). I know it's not a video, but I'm afraid this is the best I can offer right now. I find that if you read it out loud and wave your arms a lot, you get the entire effect. Have fun. [Cory asked for it in plain text. Here you go]: On the future of the music business ...I keep writing books, and writing books about this industry and the industry has never invited me over, so thank you. So, I’m going to start by pointing out that for the period I’m talking about, which is my entire youth, not ill-spent enough, but my entire youth, the record business was perfect. It was a perfect industry. And I want to tell you why. Each one of these factors is important. Number one: An entire medium and entire section of the spectrum devoted to promoting the stuff you make...thats great right...for free! An entire thing built around helping you sell more stuff. Number two: An oligopoly. For those who didn’t grab an MBA [an oligopoly] is where there is a small number of people competing against each other. If you are a band hoping to break out in 1974, 1984, 1993, you didn’t have a lot of choices, and since you didn’t have a lot of choices guess who had a lot of power, a few companies.  And, those companies could demand certain things that they needed from the world. The third thing that made it perfect is it was a key part of out lives. Look up senior prom on the internet and all you’ll see are stupid pictures, ugly dresses, and people remembering the songs they were listening to. It was the soundtrack for generation after generation. The people in the shoe business don’t have this advantage. The people at almost every business aren’t featured on the prom pages, you guys are. The next thing, entire chains of retailers devoted to selling your product. In malls they’re paying the rent, not you, Sure they’re extracting shelf space allowances from you, but isn’t that really cool? Whole stores you don’t even have to own, devoted to promoting what you sell. Next thing, you have God on your side. (slide of “Clapton is godâ€?) Where was the last time you saw a piece of graffiti that said Starbucks is God. This is really good times. The next thing, one of my favorites, this piece of technology is so cool, it is really cheap to make. You can sell it for a fair amount of money. You can’t copy it, you wear it out and then you need another one. Its pretty, other people can see you own it, and they want one too. And once I don’t have it anymore and give it to you, I don’t have it anymore. This was a really cool thing, bad idea to get rid of this. (audience clapping) Alright, I’m on a roll here. The next thing, a magazine, not one magazine, several magazine devoted to promoting the product you sell. Again, no magazines about coffee, plenty of magazines about music. And, a whole cable TV channel about it. Lets see if I understand this. Everyone else has to buy TV commercials, you guys get your own channel...and you’re allowed to put scantily clad women on it. (laughter) This is amazing. I’m almost done-almost done with all the good news. It used to cost a wicked lot of money to make a record. (laughter) Thats good for you because that means the artists need you. Because you’re the ones who pay all the money it costs to make a record. And the last amazing piece of news is this guy. The voice of Scooby Doo (slide of Casey Kasem). Because, if you made it to the top 40, you made it! There is really something special about best seller lists. Something magic happens when you make the best seller list. What happens is people buy your stuff because other people are buying it. Think about that. You’re popular because you’re popular. And it’s an ever going cycle. And that is underlying a lot of what is going on. So! We can look at this and say, “this was goodâ€?, and I’ll grant you, it was good. But that doesn’t mean it’s going to last forever. Just because all of those things lined up to make this the greatest business in history, thats legal, doesn’t mean that you should assume it’s all gonna stay. So, rather than me going through each one of those and bumming you out I’m just going to pick a couple of them and remind you of how the dynamic changed. Obviously, it’s really hard to make money doing that. Also, remember those guys who bought Beach Boys records? This is what they look like now. (slide of aging couple) (laughter) Now this is really important to understand because when the typical person is a teenager, they’re spending a lot of time looking for more. “What’s the new thing, what’s the next thing, what’s the new thing?â€? But these guys don’t want that. They want to remember THEN, they don’t go looking for the new thing. And, it’s not your fault they were baby boomers, it’s not your fault the baby boomers are getting old. It’s just true. The next thing we talked about, this technology wasn’t as good as we hoped when we started. And it’s had a lot of side effects, the biggest one of course being it’s digital. And once you make it digital, all of a sudden the math changes. Because, it used to be if I gave you my record, I didn’t have my record anymore. And now, it’s if I give you my record, I still have my record. And that’s different. I’m not saying it’s better, I’m not saying it’s worse. I’m not saying it’s moral, or immoral, I’m just saying it’s different and we got to accept that. And, one of the side effects of that is that something has fundamentally shifted here. Now, I’m going to give you a little bit of a preview which is, I think the internet is the new radio. And I think we’re needing, in the record business, people in the record business are going to have to think about the fact that, that might be a really good thing, not a really bad thing. And, we’ll come back to that in a minute. The next idea is this idea that American Top 40, Casey, I don’t even know if he is still alive but its doesn’t matter so much anymore. And the reason it doesn’t matter is because of something called the long tail. I don’t know if you’ve read this book, you should go out and read it right now, you can read it in 45 minutes. And what Chris Anderson [author of The Long Tail] pointed out is this, if I look at Netflix, what I see is that Netflix rentals, half of them are products Blockbuster doesn’t even carry. If I look at Amazon sales, half of Amazon sales are products that are unavailable in any Barnes & Noble store. If I look at the iTunes music store, half of iTunes sales are titles that you could not buy if you went into any record store. What happens when you give people an infinite number of choices in any genre, polka, doesn’t matter, they spread out. And two things occur. One, they go down the tail and start finding what’s just right for them, and two, sales go up. And so what this means is that the very structure of “how do we force as much attention as we can to the top 40â€? is actually the opposite of what leads to more consumption. And then the last one, you’ve seen it before, is this idea of suing the very people you’re trying to talk to is unfortunate. So, what’s next? And where do we go from here? I want to start by saying this really clearly. Music is not in trouble. I believe more people are listening to more music now than any time in the history of the world. Probably five times more than twenty years ago...that much! But, the music business is in trouble. And the reason the music business is in trouble is because remember all those pieces of good news?...every single one of them is not true anymore. Every. One. Now, if you want to, you can curse the fact the Solomon’s couldn’t figure out how to keep the tower going. You can curse the fact that it’s really easy to copy a CD. You can curse the fact that we don’t care about the American top 40. You can curse the fact that there isn’t top 40 radio that matters. What good is that going to do? Or, we could think about the fact that you have more momentum and more assets and more talented people than any body else. [And], at the very same time that people are listening to more music than ever before. Thats really cool. And, so when we think about transitions what we know is that timid trapeze artists are dead trapeze artists. And, that the only way you get from here to there is to just do it. Now, you might be wrong but the alternative is you WILL be wrong. There is no way to go from the perfect music business to the new music business with guaranteed ROI and written assurances-it doesn’t exist. So what will happen, I will guarantee this to you, is that 90% of the people in this industry will timidly start walking their way over and they will all fail. Thats why when you go to look up something online, you don’t go to RandomHouse.com, you go to Google.com. Thats why when you go to buy something on auction online you don’t do to Sothebys.com, you go to Ebay.com. Go down the list, what happened was AOL lost their nerve and didn’t start AOL Book where you could meet friends. They forgot. They were too busy trying to get people to buy a CD and start joining a membership internet service because they weren’t willing to do this. So it’s a little quixotic on my part but I’ve devoted my career to try and get people to do this. So, I think there is a new business here that might even be more perfect than the last one. It’s not the same business, the waves are shaped differently, and you need different skills but someone is going to win big in this business. So, what I want to do, and I’m excited-I’m talking too fast, we don’t have a lot of time here and thats fine with me, is tell you some of the tactics that I would use if I were in your shoes. But I don’t think I’m necessarily right. And if Berry Gordy had called me on the phone in 1964, I would have given him bad advice too. But, I hope what you’ll see in this is the thinking process about some of the realities of what really “isâ€? in the world because you guys are much better than I am at turning those realities into an actual business. So let me try. The first one is that people don’t listen to companies, they listen to people. And what is unique, almost entirely, compared to the movie business, the book business, whatever, is that you sell people. And, there is something magical about the connection between one person and another person. There is something magical about the way we treat celebrities.  And so part of the thing that is out there is that there is a large number of people who want to be led. There is a large number of people who want to connect. There is a large number of people who want to join a tribe. And you have the ability, from where you stand, to make some of those connections happen. What’s really neat is...my friend gets all excited because he needs to score some Bruce Springsteen tickets. Isn’t that interesting, right, because he’s using Greg to get to this tribe of people. That’s really valuable. He doesn’t need to have somebody get a copy of an album, he can just get that, you know, from Amazon for ten bucks, or for free. But the tickets, the connection, the insider, the handshake to one handshake-thats worth a lot! And so far you guys have been treating it like an interesting side effect. But it might be something right at the core of what you do every day. The next one is my biggest one, and what started me down this whole path which is, if I asked you for the name and address of your 50,000 best customers, could you give it to me? Do you have any clue? Then what happens every day is you guys go to a singles bar and you walk up to the first person you meet and propose marriage and if that person won’t marry you, you walk down the singles bar to every single person until someone says I do. Thats a stupid way to get married. A better way to get married is to go on a date. If it goes well, go on another date. Wait to tell them on the third before you tell them you’re out on parole. (laughter) Then you meet their parents, they me your parents, you get engage, you get married. Permission is the act of delivery. Anticipated, personal, and relevant messages to people who want to get them. I have every record Ricky Lee Jones has ever made including the boot legs that she sells. Rick Lee Jones should know who I am! (laughter) I have bought many of them (pause) well her agents, her people [should know who I am]. I’ve bought many of them directly from her site. I desperately want Ricky Lee to drop me a note telling me when she is going to be in town. I want her to ask me, “should I do a duets album with Willie Nelson, or should I do one with Bruce Springsteen?â€?. I want to have these interactions. And I want her to say, “I’m making another bootleg, but not until I get 10,000 people to buy it as patrons before I make itâ€?. Because I’d sign up. I’d buy five if it would help, but she doesn’t know who I am. She doesn’t know who I am, she never talks to me. And then every once in a while her record label tries to yell at me, but I’m not listening because they’re yelling at me in a place where I’m not paying attention. And so we look at these phrases, “paying attentionâ€?. That’s what you’ve wanted people to do all along. “Pay attention to this artistâ€?. Paying is a weird word isn’t it? You want me to pay you something-my attention. And if you’re wrong, I get nothing back. I had to listen to the Backstreet Boys...AHH! I want those three minutes back. So, it’s a weird relationship. The next thing is this idea that people care very much about who is sitting next to them at the concert. They care very much about the secret handshake. They care very much about the tribal identification. “Oh you like them, I like themâ€?. The Grateful Dead is an amazingly successful paradigm for many of the things I’m talking about. They didn’t make any money selling records compared to the way they made money doing everything else. Part of it was, you knew if you met someone at a dead concert, they had some things in common with you. The secret handshake, the clothes, whatever it was. And that was important and you were willing to pay money to be with those people. And after Jerry died it was very interesting. Because obviously there was thousands of hours to listen to but that’s not what the people missed. The people missed the place they could go to meet the people like them. At Facebook, it’s all about that. 64 million people who go there every day so they can meet people like them because [Facebook] is very good at dividing people up. The next thing is what I call the Seinfeld curve. The Seinfeld curve shows us Jerry’s life. If you like Jerry Seinfeld you can watch him on television, for free, in any city in the world two or three times a day. Or, you could pay $200 to go see him in Vegas. But there is no $4 option for Jerry Seinfeld. This is death. You can’t make any money in here. Because if you’re not scarce I’m not going to pay for it because I can get if for free. And one of the realities that the music industry is going to have to accept is this curve now exists for you. That for everybody under eighteen years old, it’s either free or it’s something I really want and I’m willing to pay for it. There is nothing in the center-it’s going away really fast. The next one is back to this long tail model. The magazine business imploded a long time ago. Saturday Evening Post, Time Magazine, they’re all irrelevant. But you can make a fortune with Playstation magazines, PC gaming [magazines], Game Informer, because there are silos of people who care a great deal. And if you know who those people are, if you have permission to talk to them, ready for this, if you stop looking for listeners for your music, and start looking for music for your listeners instead, the economics of your business totally changes. Magazines make 10x return on equity of books, you know why? Because magazines have subscribers and books don’t. So every time a book comes out they gotta run around looking for someone to buy it. Where as the magazine people just look for the next author to write the next article in the next magazine. The next idea is this idea of liking. There is a lot of music I like. There is not so much music I love. They didn’t call the show, “I Like Lucyâ€?, they called it “I Love Lucyâ€?. And the reason is you only talk about stuff you love, you only spread stuff you love. You find a band you really love, you’re forcing the CD on other people, “you gotta hear this!â€?. We gotta stop making music people like. There is an infinite amount of music people like. No one will ever go out of the way to hear, to pay for, music they like. And the last one is back to this tribal thing. It’s really important to people to feel like they are part of that tribe, to feel that adrenaline. We are willing to pay money, we’re willing to go through huge hoops, trampled to death in Cincinnati if necessary, in order to be in the environment where we feel that’s going on. So if I put all this together I’m going to come up with what I call the Merchant Solution. It has nothing to do with stores, it has to do with Natalie Merchant. (laughter) So, Natalie Merchant shows up in the New York Times last week saying not only do I not have a record label, I’m not going to make records anymore because I just figure out how to do it. And that is the biggest opportunity times 10,000 because Natalie doesn’t want to be in business, Natalie wants to make records. Thirty years ago Natalie couldn’t put together the scratch to record an album because she couldn’t afford a recording studio. Thats what you guys did for her. She couldn’t come up with the time and energy to go out to California to sell and pay for shelf space at Tower, thats what you guys did for her. The point is, now she needs somebody to say “let us take care of your tribeâ€?. Let us figure out the business model that says you get to do what you’re great at, write songs, perform them, find people who love you, not like you, and they are A LOT in the case of Natalie Merchant, and we will figure out not how to exploit that, not how to write a contract that you’re going to regret for the rest of your life, but to sit next to you and say guess what, there are all these people in the tribe [and] we need to figure out how to make stuff for them. And, because we have three other artists that are just like you, Cowboy Junkies, we can start mixing tribes together in appropriate ways that makes everybody happy. Because you [record label] could go to the Cowboy Junkies tribe and say Natalie Merchant is coming to town and they’ll all go. Because they love her and they love each other and they want to see each other again because they can’t wait a whole year till the [Cowboy] Junkies come back. So if the model that we loved about the record business in 1968 was A&R, taking care of artists, finding artists who people will love, and the model that we hated was brand management, I want to argue that the next model is tribal management. That the next model is to say, what you do for a living is manage a tribe...many tribes...silos of tribes. That your job is to make the people in that tribe delighted to know each other and trust you to go find music for them. And, in exchange, it could be way out on the long tail, no one wants to be on the long tail by themselves, the polka lovers like the polka lovers, they want to be together. But that you, maybe it is only one person, technology makes this really easy, your job is to curate for that tribe, like the curators upstairs [at the museum]. There is a museum of modern art tribe, you can see them here every Thursday. And if you can curate for them guess what the [musical] artists need...you! Guess what the tribe needs...you! You add an enormous amount of value by becoming a new kind of middleman. So let me go through, real quick, a bunch of tactics and we can come back to these after I’m done if you want. So, old world, new world. Old world: it mattered who you knew. You know Jan Wenner...thats a good thing. Now it doesn’t matter because there’s an infinite number of outlets-you can have your own channel. Number two: limited number of physical outlets, now there’s an infinite number of online outlets. An infinite number of places where I can find music. Number three: an emphasis on hits because you didn’t have a lot of channels, you had to own the ones you had. Now, it’s about niches. I write the number one marketing blog in the world. Who cares. Well not many people here care, but lucky for me that niche has a bunch of people in it who care. And so I enjoy my day writing that blog, I could never write a blog that appealed to everybody. I couldn’t write a Boing Boing blog or a blog about popular culture, but because I get to be the king of this little silo I get benefits out of it. Number [four]: you yelled at the consumer. You talked directly to the user. Now it’s about two things. One, consumers talking to each other and two, consumers talking to you. How easy is it for a fan to talk to you? Almost impossible because you’re not organized for that and because you didn’t see that there was a benefit. But if you’re in tribal management thats the number one best thing that could happen to you all day is that you get an email or a phone call. Alright? Back to the barrier between the consumer and the permeability. The next one: your whole life was about interrupting people with messages they didn’t want to get. Fortunately radio made that socially acceptable. Unfortunately the government made it against the law for you to pay for that to occur but you still managed to pull it off. I could get in the car, turn on the radio and hear a song I wasn’t expecting and maybe I would like it. If I didn’t like it, it didn’t cost you anything anyway. Now it’s about permission. Now I get on the radio and in my car I have either my mp3s in there or I have satellite in there, I don’t hear anything i don’t want to hear. So, the model has totally changed. Next one: you used to have a factory. The factory is the recording studio, you know, the ability to get the number of things on the shelf space at Tower. You built everything around that factory. There’s no factory anymore! If you guys put up one ad on Craigslist you’d have records here tomorrow, done, finished, by email. Because everyone has the ability to make a record now. It used to take a long time. Someone would go to the studio, Boston, and we’d hear from them three or four years later. Now you can put a State of the Union speech out as a hip-hop record one day after he gives his speech and you could sell a bunch on iTunes. It used to be “how big a share of the market can we have?â€? Now it’s about “how do we touch a tribe, just for a minute?â€? As long as the tribe is happy, we’re happy. It used to be about what features, checklist stuff, now it’s “is there a story behind this artist, is there a story behind the person?â€?. Advertising, promotion, shelf space, that used to be what you paid cash money for. Now you’re going to have to figure out how to innovate in the way you interact with people. And I think this is my last one: stability used to be “we’re big, you can trust us.â€?. Now small overhead, we own the polka silo, we only need one person to take care of it, gives you the ability to have low risk when taking care of the long tail. Customer support isn’t as important as consumer support. How do you get people to help each other? So, if I had to show you one slide again, it would be this one. It would be, “I really want to hear from youâ€?.  Ricky Lee. Please! write to me, I want to be part of the tribe, I want you to talk. It’s not about, anymore, how many people can you reach. Super Bowl, doesn’t matter. it’s irrelevant. The internet is the new radio. What that means is this you’ve been arguing and hassling and yelling and pushing for 40 years to get more air time. Now you have infinite air time. That’s what the internet is for you. The internet is the ability to get any song you want in front of the people who want to hear it with huge reach and no barriers. What matters isn’t how many, it’s who. Who are you reaching, who are the thought leaders, who are the people who are going to tell other people? Who are the people who are out there trying to find the next big thing because those people are going to influence what the next trend is, and if you’re in the middle of that trend, because you’ve used this new medium to spread the ideas, you’re going to start paying for internet airtime soon because it’s worth it. It’s not that you need to say “no, no, no, I can’t let you hear thisâ€? it’s “I want you to hear thisâ€?. Because if you hear it you might join the tribe, and if you join the tribe then over time I’ll take care of you so well you’ll want to pay me. And then people will be passionate when they hear what you do for a living, they’re going to die to have you help them meet other people in the tribe.

  • BBC Prints Irresponsible Rubbish on Apple

    Daniel Eran DilgerThe BBC has joined the London tabloid press in printing a series of articles skewering Apple over invented suppositions based entirely upon misinformed speculation and some outright lies. The worst part is that the BBC is being grossly hypocritical in its misinformation campaign against Apple, because the company is up to its eyeballs in the Microsoft-encrusted scandal surrounding its proprietary, Windows-only iPlayer imbroglio.[UK Tabloids Pick Up Zoon Awards for Technical Incompetence]Beyond Spin: Bill Thompson Wades Through BBC Hypocrisy to Spread False Information.It's bad enough that the BBC needs to bend facts to support fear, uncertainty and doubt about the iPhone. Now consider that the BBC--as a public corporation funded by British TV license taxes--is building its web video strategy on failed, proprietary technology propped up by an internationally convicted monopolist. At the same time, its publishing a uninformed rant based on speculation and conjecture that accuses Apple of doing things that approach the gravity of its own activities.This hypocrisy slows from the words of Bill Thompson, who followed the crowd in reporting that Microsoft's failed appeal in its EU monopoly case says less about Microsoft's established, anticompetitive practices spanning the last thirty years than it does about Apple's iPod popularity over the last five. Thompson weeps for Microsoft because "its every move is examined for evidence that it might be making life difficult for its rivals," while noting that "some of its competitors seem to get a very easy ride." One might expect the BBC to make excuses for the crimes of its iPlayer partner as it giggly walks lockstep with Microsoft in using the company’s proprietary and Windows-only DRM for video distribution of its publicly funded content.[BBC's iPlayer's Prospects Looking Bleak - Slashdot]Thompson's Specious Attack on Apple."The best example of this [easy ride] is Apple," Thompson announced, because the company got so much coverage for the iPhone despite it being "closed, locked down and restricted." Actually that's not a good example at all, because Apple doesn't have a market monopoly in mobiles. Apple has also never been convicted of monopolistic behaviors in the UK, the EU, or the US because it doesn't have a monopoly and doesn’t act to stop competition the way Microsoft has. Thompson admits that the iPhone doesn't leverage monopoly control among mobiles, but says "the situation is very different" in the area of music players and music downloads. What is this very different situation?"Apple has spent much time trying to ensure that anyone who buys an iPod is completely locked in to an Apple-centred world," Thompson wrote, "in which they use iTunes, buy from the iTunes Music Store, purchase only Apple-certified iPod accessories and, ideally, abandon their plans to migrate from Windows XP to Vista and instead purchase a shiny new iMac." Yes, Apple does want to sell Macs and serve its customers. However, it's simply a lie to say that iPod users are "locked into" anything, let alone being harmed by not being able to migrate to Vista, which Apple actually supports on the iPod and iTunes.Users are not locked into iTunes Music Store purchases; recall that the wags like to point out that a tiny minority of the music on iPods is purchased from iTunes and the vast majority comes from ripped CDs. Purchased tracks from iTunes can also be effortlessly burned to CD for use other other players, following the most liberal and open fair use rights in the industry. Thompson simply lied.
Saying that iPod users are locked into Apple-certified iPod accessories is also not true at all. Apple tries to earn licensing revenue from putting a "made for iPod" logo on devices in the same way Nintendo puts its "seal of approval" on its games, but anyone can deliver iPod accessories, and there's no way for Apple to stop headphones and boomboxes from working with the iPod. Thompson lied again.
His first idea was that iPod users are locked into iTunes. Yes, Apple sets up a system that's easy to use out of the box, but users aren't forced to use it. The iPod can be used with a variety of other applications, or even wiped clean and used with completely alternative firmware like RockBox. Again, Thompson just lied.[Time for Apple to face the music? - BBC NEWS]Thompson Lies Some More: Ringtones.In order to jump from lying about the iPod with generalities and get into specifics, Thompson announced, "the recent launch of the new range of iPods, including the video Nano and the iPod Touch, has shown just how far Apple is willing to go to make life difficult for its users in order to shore up its dominant position in the market for music players and downloads." He backed up his claim by browsing for some sensationalist headlines, doing zero fact checking, and then printing his findings with an enraptured spin that is simply shameful hypocrisy coming from anyone working for the BBC.First, Thompson complains, Apple now sells ringtones and doesn't support homebrew attempts to copy ringtones to the iPhone. Yes, this is unfortunate. Users shouldn't face limitations from using their own song clips, and they shouldn't have to pay extra to carve out a ringtone from songs they purchased or already own. However, this isn't entirely Apple's decision because it has to answer to the labels. It's not illegal, and it has nothing to do with anticompetitive monopoly dominance of the music industry. It's really the opposite: an opportunity for rivals to compete against the iPhone by offering a nicer way to play "My Humps" when their phones ring. So far, the US ringtone industry revolves around $2.50 - $3.00 clips that expire after several months. Thompson lied with a half story and a false premise that do nothing to support the idea that Apple has a monopoly.[Apple's iTunes Ringtones and the Complex World of Copyright Law]Thompsons Lies Some More: Video Output.His second proof that Apple is "shoring up its dominant position" is that "it seems that the new generation of iPods will not output video through cables or docks that aren't Apple authorized and have a specific 'authentication' chip." It seems? Why doesn't Thompson point out that he read some high pitched conspiracy theory about why older cables and docks don't work with the new models, and is presenting it as a proof of anticompetitive, monopolist behavior without even checking the claim out?The reality is that all the new iPods continue to support the same docks as they did, but their video output has changed due to using different hardware. The Nano and Classic continue to work with old docks and cables, while the Touch and the iPhone will require a new dock connector cable because they now output both composite and component video. They work differently; no conspiracy, no spy authentication chips. The iPhone and the latest generation of iPods will work via a dock connector cable without a dock unit, so there's no chip involved. Even if there were, it would not be illegal for Apple to sell proprietary cables such as those that come with the Xbox, the Zune, the Palm Pilot, and most every music player and mobile phone on the market. The only difference is that Apple has kept its dock connector the same over the last several years so that iPod customers can reuse their old cables. Even if Thompson doesn't understand the issues and didn't bother to look into it, presenting false information as facts to support an idea that they do not support is still a lie. [An in-depth iPod Touch review: Video output differences - AppleInsider]Thompsons Lies Some More: Linux Music Management."The nastiest little change is to the iTunes library itself," Thompson wrote. Apple made minor changes to the metadata database used on the iPod. When this change broke unauthorized music management software, some Linux advocates announced press releases saying Apple was persecuting them and trampling their rights to use the iPod. It turned out that the outcry was simply overwrought, and that a fix was easy to deliver. What Apple had really done was improve how the iPod stores its data so that it would be less susceptible to file corruption. Apple doesn't officially support the small minority of people who use the iPod with Linux or alternatives to iTunes on other platforms, so it bears no accountability for fixing their homebrew software when it makes changes to its products. It might be valid to complain that Apple should offer such support, but ignoring Linux has no relationship to establishing a monopoly or market dominance. If Apple was offering a locked in, anti-consumer product, it wouldn't have open source users buying its product in the first place. Unlike the Xbox and Zune, Apple doesn't stop users from installing Linux or RockBox on their iPods, a difference Thompson can’t seem to grasp. Thompson admitted that Apple "will not limit copying or restrict attempts to strip digital rights management code from tracks" and "will not stop people adding non-DRM files they have downloaded from the internet to their library," but then jumped at the opportunity to speculate that Apple is shutting out Linux users, as if Apple would prefer Linux users to either install Windows or buy a music player elsewhere. Which scenario helps Apple "maintain music dominance?" It's an inane argument.Irresponsible Open Source Mouths.Remember when the EFF irresponsibly announced its speculation that Apple was stuffing megabytes of personal information into iTunes tracks? It later recanted, but didn't apologize for the false accusation. The fact that open source advocates are quick to fire out accusations but commonly shrug off any accountability for what they say makes their comments very hard to take seriously. Thompson's uncritical, uninformed parroting of such accusations is not only stomach churning, but egregious given the BBC's wholehearted support for a video distribution system that unilaterally forces people to use Windows to access content that is not available elsewhere, as iTunes music is.Thompson keeps going, castigating Apple for stopping Real from selling its own flavor of DRM that promised support for the iPod, and impugning Apple for supposedly having "business practices do not stand up to scrutiny." Thompson added, "when it comes to music downloads it [Apple] is just as bad as Microsoft on servers."Oh really? Do you have to pay Apple client access licenses for the right to connect your iPod to iTunes or to access the Music Store? Does your music die after three plays or three days? Do you have no choice in the market for MP3 players apart from devices that run the iPod firmware or use Apple’s iTunes software? Equating Apple with Microsoft would be foolish for anyone to do, let alone some misinformed, generalizing, sensationalist wag writing for a public corporation that ties its video downloads to Microsoft's Windows-only DRM.Thompson's Faulty Conclusion to a Shoddy Article.The great model of interoperability, Thompson points out, is Microsoft's PowerPoint. That's because Apple was able to deliver Keynote with PowerPoint compatibility. "Apple can sell Keynote because it took PowerPoint apart and figured out how the files work," Thompson explained.Perhaps Thompson doesn't get it: Apple's ability to maintain compatibility with PowerPoint is just as tenuous as Linux users' ability to make iTunes-compatible song management software for the iPod. Microsoft doesn't support standards in PowerPoint. It uses a crufty, weird, undocumented, proprietary format that changes with every release. That's why the industry is aligning behind Open Document as an international standard, and why Microsoft stuffed ballots in Cuba, Azerbaijan, and Sweden to fast track the establishment of its own proprietary formats as a false "standard" without having to answer the concerns of worldwide standards organizations who overwhelmingly determined that Microsoft's OOXML format was problematic and technically inferior.Oblivious to all this, Thompson announced, "had Apple been unable to do so [reverse engineer the proprietary PowerPoint format], or found that every time it figured out what was happening Microsoft changed the format, it would have complained loudly." Apparently Thompson has been paying no attention to technology over the last two decades as the world community has complained about Microsoft's doing just that.[Office Wars 3 - How Microsoft Got Its Office Monopoly][Office Wars 4 - Microsoft’s Assault on Lotus, IBM][Myth 4: The iTunes Monopoly Myth]The reason Microsoft was on trial in the EU dates back to complaints filed in 1998. The independent US monopoly trial followed up on earlier complaints from the FTC and Department of Justice. Similar complaints haven't ever been filed about Apple's iPod business, but rather only about the arcane, territorial pricing of music established by the big labels, most of whom are owned and managed by European companies.The EU certainly should fix the problems of the music business in its countries, and demand fair use provisions from music and media providers. However, trying to spin the complex situation off as proof that Apple is anything like Microsoft is not only disingenuous, it's an outright lie. Using a bunch of half-baked, ignorant web rumors to support a position that Apple should just allow anything and everything is also dishonest. Doing all of this speciously false complaining while standing on the Microsoft-enamored soapbox of the BBC just makes Thompson look even more incompetent and clueless about the reality around him. What do you think? I really like to hear from readers. Comment in the Forum or email me with your ideas. Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast! Submit to Reddit or Slashdot, or consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!

  • Adobe trimming Expo budget, 600 jobs [updated]

    Filed under: Macworld, Rumors, Software, Graphic DesignMacworld notes today that Adobe won't have a booth at Macworld Expo, but will still be offering training sessions at the conference. Traditionally, Adobe's booth has been a major presence on the show floor. The bad news might not end there: A tipster with purported connections inside Adobe told us that the company is considering laying off a significant fraction of its nearly 7,000 employees, including management. Update 4 p.m.: The axe fell a few hours ago at Adobe, according to two three former employees, but we don't know how widespread the damage is. Update 5 p.m.: Mike Downey, principal evangelist for the Flash, Flex and AIR products is "no longer with Adobe." Update 5:10 p.m.: Adobe issued a press release: "Adobe also announced the implementation of a restructuring program, and has taken steps to reduce its headcount by approximately 600 full-time positions globally. The restructuring will result in anticipated pre-tax charges totaling approximately $44 million to $50 million. The Company expects approximately $28 million to $30 million of the restructuring charges to be recorded in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008." Read the full press release here. This points to some serious, knee-jerk cost-cutting at Adobe, since Macworld Expo has been so valuable to Adobe's relationship with the Mac user base in the past. "Adobe has decided to shift its focus at the Macworld trade show this year," the company said in a statement given to Macworld magazine. "Macworld [Expo] is a valuable industry show and we will still be an active part of it with members of our product team involved in Macworld tracks, including a full day of CS4 demo sessions with Adobe evangelists on Wednesday, January 7." Adobe Creative Suite 4 was released in October. [Via O'Grady's PowerPage.]TUAWAdobe trimming Expo budget, 600 jobs [updated] originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:15:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • ★ Macworld Expo Predictions

    Predictions and advance commentary for tomorrow’s Macworld keynote, some based on consensus rumors, some based on no more than wishful thinking on the part of yours truly. This is all conjecture and tea-leaf-reading (well, mostly), so, please, no wagering. I keep two questions in mind when evaluating Apple product ideas: Would people run out to stand in line to buy this immediately? If not, is there a long-term strategic reason for Apple to start selling this now? If the answer to both questions is “no”, then Apple isn’t going to do it. The iPhone is a perfect example of a #1; the Apple TV is a #2. New Sub-Notebook MacBook: Yes Apple hasn’t had a small notebook in its lineup since the 12-inch PowerBook G4, which I still see in wide use. If you’re using a portable as a portable, smaller size and lighter weight make a tremendous difference. The demand for a good notebook smaller and lighter than standard MacBooks is strong; I think it’s a sure thing that Apple is set to announce one. (Of course, I said so before last year’s Macworld, too.) I say the consensus rumors are right: super-thin, no built-in optical drive, widescreen 12-inch display. It will use a hard drive, not flash memory, for storage. (Look no further than the iPod Classic to see how hard drives don’t keep a device from being super-thin). Rumors are already running strong that it’ll be called MacBook Air. (I like it, not sure though if Nike would.) Newton-y Tablet Thing: No I am nearly convinced that this product exists, at least as a project in development. My hunch is that AppleInsider has it spot-on: it’s in development, but not yet ready to launch, and, perhaps, never will if Apple can’t get it right. (Recall Steve Jobs’s statement to Walter Mossberg that he’s as proud of some of the products Apple decided not to ship as he is of the ones they did.) Like the iPhone, it runs “OS X” but not Mac OS X, does not run Mac apps, and will not be called a “Mac”. The big problem with a “tablet” computer of any sort is that 15 years of industry history indicate that people do not want to buy tablet computers. But the iPhone, arguably, is a tablet computer — a sub-tablet, if you will. The key mistake with failed efforts like Microsoft’s Tablet PC (and even Apple’s own Newton) was that these devices attempt to do too much. It’s seen as a feature that Tablet PCs run the full version of Windows. But why force software UI’s designed for traditional hardware form factors upon a totally different device? A successful tablet-like device from Apple, I think, would clearly be designed as a secondary computing device — a satellite attached and synched to a Mac or PC (probably, of course, through iTunes). There’s still the “what would I use it for?” factor. It seems to me it would need to be something more than just an iPod Touch with a larger screen — if that’s all it is, then what’s the point of buying one instead of a smaller, poctetable, iPod Touch or iPhone? I simply lack the cleverness to imagine what that hook might be — but I can’t imagine Apple releasing such a product without an obvious “Oh I gotta buy that” hook. Anyway: I do think something like this is in the works, but I don’t think it’s coming out now. I’d love to be wrong. Ubiquitous Wireless Networking for MacBooks: Please After using my iPhone for a few months, it started feeling weird that my PowerBook doesn’t have ubiquitous wireless networking: Wi-Fi when available, and seamless, instant switchover to something else when it isn’t. Just what that “something else” is, I don’t know. EVDO? WiMax? A Bluetooth connection to share an iPhone’s EDGE connection? I don’t care. But I’d pay for it. Ubiquitous networking is certainly the most intriguing thing about Amazon’s Kindle. It just feels crippled that I can’t get a network connection — even a slow one — once I’m outside the range of Wi-Fi. Wireless Time Machine Backups: Yes Time Machine is very cool; the first backup that qualifies as “you don’t have to do anything, it just works”. But currently it only works using a storage device connected via USB or FireWire. Tethered backups are irritating with notebooks — and MacBooks are the fastest-growing segment of Apple’s Mac hardware sales. The problem is that when you want to use your portable away from your desk, it’s a pain to disconnect mounted USB and FireWire drives. You can’t just pulled the plugs — you’ve got to unmount them in the Finder first. And, once you do so, to get Time Machine backups running again, you’ve got to re-tether your storage drive. Leopard developer seeds all supported network backups to USB drives connected to an AirPort base station. The feature was also demoed at WWDC. It was removed (or, better said, disabled) very late in Leopard’s development, supposedly because of a security problem that was discovered, but I expect the feature to return, perhaps in 10.5.2. It’s a terrific idea, perfect for multi-Mac homes and small offices. But so why not sell a device as a dedicated product — a big 500 GB or larger hard drive (or array of them) with built-in AirPort networking. No need to attach it to a separate AirPort base station, no temptation to use the device for anything other than one purpose: backing up via Time Machine. Just plug it into a power outlet, run through a simply configuration tool a la AirPort Utility, and it’s ready. When it first appears on your network, your (Leopard-running) Mac could prompt to ask if you’d like to use it for Time Machine, the same way it prompts when you first plug in a new USB or FireWire drive. iTunes Movie Rentals: Yes This one seems like such a done deal that it barely qualifies as a rumor. It seems obvious: Unlike with music, there’s been a strong market for movie rentals for as long as there’s been a home video market. Most movies aren’t worth watching more than once. Reports (based on leaks from studio executives) indicate rentals will cost $3-5, and will expire after 24 hours. If true, presumably that means they’ll expire 24 hours after you beginning playing them, not 24 hours after downloading. It’d be nice if the terms were a bit more flexible than that. One of the best things about Netflix, and something which makes it far more appealing than traditional brick-and-mortar Blockbuster-style rentals, is that you can watch movies on your own terms. A Netflix-style iTunes movie subscription service that lets you keep a certain number of unlocked movies open at the same time would be killer. Apple TV 2.0: Yes Jobs has called Apple TV a “hobby” for Apple. I think they have high hopes for it, but calling it a hobby is a practical way to buy time for it. What Apple did with the iPod was start as small and simple as they could — one device, in one configuration, only for the Mac, and all it did was play recorded audio — and then build the platform slowly from there. Things like Windows support, color screens, video playback, and expanding to a range of form factors all came incrementally. I think that’s the plan with Apple TV. Start simple and humble, and build from there, year after year. One obvious improvement (albeit contingent upon another rumor) would be to allow us to buy (or rent) movies and TV shows directly from the iTunes Store, right from the Apple TV. If the iPhone can do it, the Apple TV should too. I still think it’d be good business for Apple to sell their own HDTV sets with Apple TV built-in — more money for Apple, one fewer device spewing cables behind the display. DRM-Free iTunes Plus Music From the Other Major Music Labels: No I think Apple would love to have this, but it seems pretty clear that the major labels — other than EMI, of course — are convinced that it’s in their interest to withhold DRM-free music from Apple, in the hopes of helping Amazon gain market share. It actually agree that it’s in the music labels’ interest for Amazon’s music store to succeed. I’m not sure, though, that withholding DRM-free music from Apple is spiting anyone other than iTunes customers. I suspect the vast majority — an overwhelming majority — of iTunes music purchases are made by people who have at best only a vague inkling of what “DRM” is. If there’s any actual logic to it, it’s PR — withholding DRM-free music from Apple makes it easier to paint Apple as a company bent on using iTunes as a competitive cudgel to lock customers in to iPod hardware. Only a hack reporter would buy into that line, given Steve Jobs’s unequivocol “Thoughts on Music” open letter last year. One thing that would dispel any negative stories on the state of the iTunes empire, of course, would be the long-awaited debut of The Beatles catalog, exclusively at iTunes, perhaps with an on-stage visit from Paul McCartney. New iPhone Hardware: No, With a Minor Exception Apple announced the original iPhone a year ago, but they didn’t ship it until six months ago. They’re not going to announce new iPhones six months in advance again. (It was to their advantage last year to cause people to postpone phone purchases until the iPhone appeared; that’s not the case now that the iPhone is on the market.) If anything, I don’t expect new iPhones to appear until next fall, at the yearly iPod/iTunes pre-holiday season special event, leaving the original iPhone on the market for over a year. Why revise hardware for a product that, by all accounts, is selling remarkably well as-is? The only exception I could see would be a 16 GB iPhone that’s otherwise unchanged from the current 8 GB model. iPhone SDK News: No I can see the upcoming iPhone SDK getting a mention from Jobs on stage, a reminder that it’s coming and that’s it’s going to be great, but Macworld isn’t WWDC, and SDKs don’t make for splashy presentations. If I’m wrong, it’ll be because they have a demo queued up from a third-party developer with early access to the SDK. Actual third-party software (written against the actual official SDK) is demoable. Games, perhaps? The apparently-leaked 1.1.3 firmware might make for a good demo, what with the jiggly icons and whatnot. Cinema Displays With Better Resolution, Brighter Screens, and Built-In Cameras: Yes If I keep predicting it, eventually I’ll be right.

  • Britons snap up 'tens of thousands' of iPhones

    Filed under: Other Events, iPhone Over the last few days, there's been plenty of reports about the scale of the iPhone's launch here in the U.K, and what a 'flop' it was. Not so fast, dear readers, for Ars Technica is reporting that on Friday night carrier O2 activated 8,000 handsets: more than double their initial estimate of 3,000, despite issues with activations on the network's side (where have we heard that before?). Problems aside, the iPhone is apparently O2's fastest selling handset with 'tens of thousands' sold. Whilst not as high as the 70,000+ some had been murmuring, that's a remarkable achievement given the widespread poor reporting of the launch by the mainstream media.Whilst in the queue on Friday, people were being asked what they thought about the iPhone 'lacking a camera', with at least one news crew leaving the Regent Street store with a significant portion of laughter at that question. Of course, with Apple having kept the U.K. iPhone under such tight lock, few had actually seen one 'in the flesh', but not seeing it in the flesh seemingly didn't stop people deriding the device out of hand.Gripes aside, it seems to have been a moderately successful launch, if not setting the world on fire. Thankfully, if you weren't to be found queuing for an iPhone on Friday, there's a plethora of photographs from the launch here in the U.K. Thanks to all those who left comments on our (repeatedly, and abruptly, interrupted) Live-Blog. If you're wandering where the queues were, you might want to check photos from London #1 #2, Manchester, Birmingham and across the country.Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Analysts starting to realize Apple has a brand new source of revenue

    Bloomberg posted an article yesterday noting that iPhone service fees are prompting analysts to revalue Apple's earnings. Those who have been reading my Analyzing Apple reports will already be up on this trend, but apparently some financial analysts are just now realizing that yes, wireless carriers really are selling their souls to Steve Jobs to carry the iPhone, and that those tributes are going to bolster Apple earnings over the next few years. Now I've got to apologize to readers for my lateness in posting the July Analyzing Apple report and getting the October/November one published (they're both coming -- really!), but even if you go back and read the June Analyzing Apple report, you'll see this little bit of info at the end:Hidden revenue justifies a higher P/E ratio. Apple announced in April that it would recognize revenue from the iPhone and Apple TV hardware sales over 24 months. This means that iPhone and Apple TV sales will largely appear on Apple’s balance sheet for the next couple years instead of in its income statement. Blackfriars believes that this hidden and guaranteed future revenue justifies raising the P/E ratio that we use to calculate target stock prices to 35 from 30. We fully expect Apple stock to reach those new targets of $131 in FY07 and $161 in FY08.And as you can see by those low price targets, that was before Apple's highly-successful US iPhone launch, blew out its Q4 FY07 quarter, and forecast a rosier-than-expected Q1 FY08.So are those $250 price goals ridiculous? Well, here's a pretty good clue from a Dow Jones report today titled "Consumer electronics seen taking share in holiday spending":"We believe this Christmas season could be dominated by three major categories within the consumer electronics space: flat-panel televisions, videogames/accessories, and Apple-branded products," said Credit Suisse analysts in a recent note to clients.They see a similar pattern unfolding as in 1998, when the popularity and affordability of the personal computer likely stripped away demand for more traditional holiday items such as apparel and accessories.This year, it is the desirability, variety, and pricing of such items as flat-screen TVs, Apple Inc.'s latest iPod models and its iPhone, and videogaming systems that could create a consumer electronics-skewed holiday season, according to Credit Suisse.The fact that Apple-branded products show up -- the only consumer electronics products specified by name -- in the top three most in demand consumer products suggests that Apple's holiday sales will be above what many expect. And with November iPhone launches occurring in the UK, Germany, and France, and the Euro-to-dollar exchange rate rising, Apple is developing a recurring revenue stream that no one really has historical data for, yet we believe that this revenue stream will add billions of dollar to its balance sheet each quarter.So here's a rule of thumb I've come up with to provide a handle on Apple earnings, based upon my own models.In very rough numbers, each million iPhones sold adds about $0.02 per share to annual earnings, $2 to Apple's target stock price, and $350 million to its balance sheet.Looked at this way, if Apple sells ten million iPhones next year, just those iPhones will have added $0.20 to its earnings, $20 to its stock price, and almost $3.5 billion to its cash horde to pay for future earnings. And of course, the iPhone is only one -- and currently the smallest -- of Apple's four lines of business. So unless Apple stumbles somewhere along the way, those $250 price goals that analysts are quoting aren't ridiculous; they're just based on revenue streams and deferred revenue that aren't immediately obvious.Full disclosure: Despite the nearly 10% drop so far today, the author still owns Apple stock. And for those investors agonizing over that drop, here's some encouraging news: the queue to buy iPhones in the UK tomorrow has started forming at the Regent Street store in London, 24 hours in advance of sales.Technorati Tags: Analyzing Apple, Apple, Finance, Financial analysis, iPhone, Projections

  • Why Dan Frommer and Scott Moritz Are Wrong on iPhone Sales

    Daniel Eran DilgerSilicon Alley Insider's Dan Frommer says Apple's announcement of reaching its million mark goal in iPhone sales three weeks early is actually bad news for Apple and is convolutedly "below plan." He also says the announcement only props up the speculative conjecture by Scott Moritz of the Street that Apple's iPhones sales are somehow woefully below expectations. They're wrong, here's why.The PremiseFrommer wrote that Apple isn't selling iPhones as fast as planned and is set to only sell around half of its 2008 goal.His premise revolves around the idea that if Apple were selling iPhones at "a constant rate," a million phones in 74 days would be five million per year. However, because it sold over a quarter of those in the opening day and a half at the end of June, Frommer calculates that sales of the remainder in the 72 days since the first of July mean that Apple is only hitting a "3.6 million annual run rate."By the end of 2008, that would only result in 5.8 million units instead of the ten million goal Apple. [Silicon Alley Insider: Apple's iPhone: 1 Million Is Below Plan]Strike One: The Run Rate Myth.The most obvious problem with that idea is the fact that devices don't sell at a constant “run rate." Apple's iPhone sales took off at launch much faster than the original iPod due to the fact that a swell of early adopters were ready to buy it after being convinced over six months of anticipation. At the same time, many potential buyers held off on plans to buy the iPhone until they could read reviews and get a real sense of how it worked. Many were also locked into contracts with Verizon or Sprint. With only six months of advanced notice, it will still be a few more months before the majority of buyers who want an iPhone even get the chance to buy one without having to pay outrageous fees to cancel their existing mobile contract. iPhone sales are also now taking on the network effect of the iPod, as early adopters show their friends. All these factors have difficult to estimate impacts upon sales that make trying to figure a static “run rate� a very simplistic and pointless exercise.However, there is another factor that simply blows the entire idea of a static “run rate� out of the water. Last November, I predicted that sales of the Zune would bomb that winter because Microsoft had failed to critically examine Apple's historical sales patterns. Sure enough, the Zune was thrown against the rocks by Apple's riptide. Frommer's idea ignores that same reality by imagining that iPhone sales will schlep along at a linear pace. Had Frommer tried to calculate an "annual run rate" for the iPod based on a portion of third quarter sales at any point over the last half decade, he would never have been close to accurate. That’s because Apple’s iPod sales roughly triple every winter quarter.In 2002, it sold nearly as many iPods in its winter quarter as it did the first three quarters combined: 219,000In 2003, it actually sold more iPods in its winter quarter than in the first three combined: 733,000In 2004, it again sold more iPods in its winter quarter than in the first three: 4,580,000In 2005, it sold more than 4 million units every quarter, but still sold nearly three times as many in the winter: 14,480,000.In 2006, it sold more than 8 million units every quarter, and then sold over 21 million in the winter quarter.In 2007, it has maintained quarterly sales between 10.5 and 9.8 million per quarter.[Strike 3: Why Zune will Bomb this Winter]Strike Two: The Have it Both Ways Myth.One particularly annoying bit of analysts' talk about Apple's expectations is that they can't seem to decide if Apple's projections are bad because they are conservative lowballs, or if they are bad for being overly enthusiastic figures the company won't be able to reach. They often try to describe them as both, loading contempt on both sides of the scale. This makes them look very foolish. Do they think we have no memory, or are they just changing their stories back and forth in sheer desperation?Frommer tried to argue both sides at once in the same article. Recall that Apple only ever gave two iPhone sales goals: one million by the end of the first quarter of sales, and ten million by the end of 2008. In his piece, Frommer suggests Apple will only be able to sell 5.8 million iPhones by the end of 2008, based on that fallacious "run rate." That would be just over half of Apple's ten million goal. However, he then says that Apple's immediate short term goal was an unimpressive low ball, no doubt because Apple reached it three weeks early.Apple's stated goals must be a greatly frustrating logical conundrum for Frommer, because even at a “run rate" of one million in a quarter, Apple could only ever hope to sell six million iPhones by the end of 2008, another five quarters later. No wonder he's faced with trying to say that the immediate goal was too low and the longer term one is too high! Frommer needs to stop trying to pound round facts into square holes just so they can be stacked up like bricks the way he would like them to be.Strike Three: The Market Bearing Price Myth.While Frommer and Moritz are enamored with the idea that iPhone prices could only be cut if sales were in crisis, a variety of obvious market realities don't support that simpleton idea. Between now and the end of 2008, Apple has just two holiday seasons. If it wants to dramatically exploit its historical potential for selling roughly three times as many gadgets during the winter season, it makes sense to trade off unit pricing for volume sales, even if it could perhaps sell fewer at a higher price and make more short term profits doing so.Such a strategy isn't unique. Microsoft and Sony currently lose money on their new game consoles in desperate bids to establish their gaming and HD video playing platforms. Even so, this year they both cut prices again to accelerate volume demand. Nintendo purposely aimed low to capture volume sales using a more attractive price point. Given high demand for the Wii and extremely constrained availability, Nintendo "should" seemingly raise its console price and profiteer. It hasn't. While prices are clearly linked to demand, it is a common fallacy to think that the "right price" is always the highest the market will bear. Jobs' 99 cent pricing in the iTunes store is clearly not the top price consumers will pay for downloads. Music labels are fuming that other licensees such as Verizon will collect $2.50 or more for portions of a song sold as a ringtone. Jobs wants media prices low to induce volume sales and attract buyers to the legitimate market for music and movie downloads. Labels and studios want "market pricing," in part so they can jack up the price of popular music to exploit consumers, and in part so they can exploit artists by threatening to release their work at lower tiered prices and signal to the market that their careers are over.[Universal vs Apple in the iTunes Store Contracts][Nintendo Wii vs Microsoft Xbox 360 and Sony PS3]This All Happened Before.Dial back the clock twenty years, and you'll discover that Steve Jobs also fought with Apple CEO John Sculley over the price of the original Macintosh. The desire to use an expensive but pioneering amount of RAM and a futuristic new processor had inflated the price of the Mac, but the design team was still able to deliver it at a fairly attractive price point of $1,995. Scully determined that the Mac would still sell at $2495, delivering high profits to fund splashy advertising. Nothing on the market was really similar to the Mac apart from Apple's $9,995 Lisa. VisiOn for the PC similarly cost nearly $10,000 and did far less. Sculley thought that the market would bear anything Apple might charge. Andy Hertzfeld recalled on Folklore.org that in October 1983, "Steve Jobs strode into the software area one evening, looking angry. 'You're not going to like this,' he told us, 'but Sculley is insisting that we charge $2495 for the Mac instead of $1995, and use the extra money for a bigger marketing budget. He figures that the early adopters will buy it no matter what the price. He also wants more of a cushion to protect Apple II sales. But don't worry, I'm not going to let him get away with it!'"Jobs fought Sculley over the price increase, but Sculley prevailed. Sure enough, Macs did sell well out of the gate to early adopters at the higher price, but sales then began to stall. While Jobs couldn't cut the price for the original Mac to induce wider adoption in the mid 80s, he could choose to cut the price of the iPhone early and use interest in the iPod Touch to ramp users toward the iPhone. That price cut will dramatically boost sales this winter, just as iPod price cuts and feature refreshes do every year.Apple will earn less profit on individual hardware sales of the iPhone, and may even earn slightly less money overall this quarter than it might have selling the iPhone at $599. However, a $399 iPhone will dramatically boost the company's sustainable subscriber revenues and devastatingly cut into stationary rivals like Palm and the Windows Mobile licensees, giving them little opportunity retool and strike back with copycat products.  [Price Fight - Folklore.org][Office Wars 3 - How Microsoft Got Its Office Monopoly]Strike Four: The Myth of Unlimited Availability.Another problem with idea that iPhone sales were in crisis--and that a price cut is a conspiracy to hide the truth--is that Apple sold out of iPhones in many of its retail stores throughout the first three weeks on sale.Carl Howe of Blackfriar's Communications tracked iPhone availability every day through July, and then animated the results in a movie that depicts just how constrained iPhone inventories in Apple's retail stores were. So not only did Apple meet its 94 day goal 20 days early, but it did so despite having no or few iPhones to sell in many of its stores during the first 21 days. Price isn't just related to demand, but also to supply.That also demonstrates the fallacy of Scott Moritz' assertion that Apple secretly planned to sell a million iPhones in a day and a half, and was sorely disappointed after failing to do so. How could Apple have planned on selling a million units in one day when it didn't even have a million units on the shelves of its stores during the first month? Remember, Moritz wasn't saying Apple had a delivery problem in getting enough units to stores as Nintendo is experiencing with its constrained supplies of the Wii. Instead, he tried to suggest that interest in the iPhone was far below Apple's estimates, and buyers were leaving it on the shelf like Windows Vista. The result, he claimed, was that "rivals were rejoicing."The only real rejoicing by rivals was that Moritz was volunteering to repeat the talking points handed to him by Verizon shill Roger Entner of IAG Research. Just hours before Apple announced it had sold a million units, Moritz tried to get some traction out of the idea that Apple had dropped the price in desperation to find another half million or so customers over the next three weeks. Apple isn't the typical tech company being run by visionless bean counters. It it were, it would have continued selling $600 iPhones at least through the end of September and then announced that it had sold its million. Apple had to push out new iPods in early September and fit the iPhone into the price range because next month it will be rolling out Leopard and a series of new software updates. Apple feeds the press in small, consistent, and regular feedings so reporters know what to write. If Apple were a big stupid company such as, say HP, it would parade out a mix of dozens of consumer and business products all together in one big event, and nobody would ever hear about any of it. HP did.[Why a million iPhones in 74 days is better than you think- Blackfriars][HP's marketing this week: fashionable but ineffective - Blackfriars][Unraveling Anti-Apple Panic: the iPhone Launch Success] [More on Scott Moritz and the Jim Cramer Misinformation Engine]Strike Five: It's Too Late to Deny the iPhone.The most comical part of Frommers’ analysis is that he’s trying to stuff a cat back into a bag and explain that there was never really any cat, long after everyone in the room heard the purr and pet the thing. Sorry, but the windows of opportunity to doubt the iPhone have long since closed.Real Windows Enthusiasts were aware of the need to deny the iPhone well before its release. They all chimed in with reasons why the iPhone wouldn't work, wouldn't offer what consumers want, and wouldn't sell well, all hoping that their non-stop misinformation campaigns would act as a self-fulfilling prophesy. They failed miserably.John Dvorak began his smear campaign immediately, appearing on CNBC to say that the iPhone was "trending against what people are really liking in phones nowadays, which are those little keypads.� He explained, “The BlackJack, the Samsung, the BlackBerry obviously pushes this kind of thing. The Palm, all of these. I guess some of these stocks went down on the Apple announcement, thinking that Apple could do no wrong. But I think Apple can do wrong, and I think this is it." Reader Jim Barrow sent in a link to a MarketWatch article from March, where Dvorak scribed a rambling diatribe entitled "Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone." He offered no factual basis for worrying that the iPhone might not work out apart from the offhanded comment that "there is no likelihood that Apple can be successful in a business this competitive," words which echoed Dvorak's 1984 observation that "the Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse.' There is no evidence that people want to use these things."In April, Dvorak inflamed his 'pull the plug' rhetoric further in a TWiT podcast, where he reported to an audience of hundreds of thousands that the iPhone only delivered "40 minutes of talk time" and "the interface fouls up constantly.� Dvorak said that his inside information on the iPhone came from a "guy at Cingular who’s testing the product," adding, "he’s telling me confidentially and I shouldn’t be telling anybody."[John Dvorak: How Wrong Can One Guy Be?][Readers Write: Don't Write About John Dvorak Anymore]It'll Be the Death of You.Dvorak was joined by Rob Enderle, who called the iPhone “damned� and “not a very good phone� at every opportunity in the months before its launch, despite not really knowing anything about it, or even ever offering any rational criticism. Instead, Enderle appealed to fantasy fears of sexual assault, murder, and the violent death of children, all of which he suggested might somehow be related to the iPhone. Unaware that a password protected iPhone--or even a unauthorized unit without a configured service plan--can still be used to make emergency phone calls, Enderle wrote about, "an emergency situation where, say, a woman was being raped and couldn’t call for help because she didn’t remember her iPhone password." As I understand, with a Windows Mobile phone, even if the unit crashed while trying to place the call, at least the victim could use it like a brick as a blunt weapon. Enderle also feared that being unable to take out the battery would somehow making recharging it impossible, resulting an a scenario where one might end up on “the wrong side of town� with a dead iPhone and be murdered because of it. Being on the wrong side of town was apparently the source of most murders prior to the arrival of the cell phone, which somehow made it safe to be in bad neighborhoods. For those who unfazed by the prospect of one's own own grizzly death in relation to the iPhone, Enderle appealed to his readers to please think of the children, particularly the potential for their brutal decapitation in an iPhone-related collision. "If you are buying this phone for a child or another member of your family," Enderle warned, "please emphasize that entering data on this phone while driving is dangerous." In contrast, operating the slide out keyboards of an HTC brick phone, or using both hands to thumb type on a BlackBerry may or may not save your children as they drive off an embankment, but at least you'll know they didn't die at the hands of Apple's "damned" iPhone.[SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1970s][Mac OS X vs Linux: Third Party Software and Security]Pure Concentrated Evil with a Multitouch Screen.Brian Lam of Gizmodo published an impassioned plea to boycott the iPhone shortly before its launch, due to the fact that Cingular had purchased the AT&T name, a brand Gizmodo's writer correlated with "monopoly tactics" in the late 70s. Gizmodo hasn't ever called for the boycotting of Verizon Wireless, which is well known for its anti-consumer tactics and which shares just as much blood with the old AT&T as its Baby Bell sibling Cingular, nor has it ever urged the boycott Microsoft products due to "monopoly tactics." Gizmodo also failed to boycott any other GSM phones that are tied to AT&T.Gizmodo's Lam and Enderle then teamed up with Slate's David Sessions in an article purporting to expose Apple's rated battery life for the iPhone. Sessions complained about the attention the iPhone was getting, and tried to dismiss Apple's announcement of a two fold increase in battery life over what was originally advertised. Unbelievably, Sessions and friends could only explain away the iPhone's jump in talk time by crediting its glass screen, saying that "glass transmits light more efficiently than plastic." That and some witchcraft.However, all of these individuals sharply reduced their squirt rate of false information after the iPhone's successful launch. In day and a half, Apple sold 270,000 iPhones compared to the 500,000 Palm OS Treos, 1.03 million RIM BlackBerrys, and 1.51 million Windows Mobile phones that were sold worldwide in the first 90 days of 2007.Apple has since nearly matched highflying RIM in sales during July, despite being limited to a single carrier and only offered for sale in the US. At this point, denying the iPhone is like saying the Earth is flat. It might be fun to do at a Renaissance Faire, but pretending to seriously doubt reality is not a good career move unless you work for the Street--or perhaps Rupert Murdoch, as Dvorak does.[Secret iPhone Details Lost in a Sea of Hype and Hate][iPhone Sales vs Zune, Palm, RIM, Symbian, Windows Mobile]And Now: a Warning.Let it be known that anyone who publishes further misinformation or blows out similar inanity will risk being instantly awarded a Zoon on the spot. No complicated voting, no tedious application process. New Zoon nominees will be rubber stamped with the same effortless fast tracking as the ECMA declaring Microsoft technology as an international standard.In fact, I’m going to totally Zoon Dan Frommer and Scott Moritz right now, as well as John Dvorak, Rob Enderle, Brian Lam, David Sessions, and even Roger Entner. And John Sculley. And while I’m handing out an intellectual property construct that costs me nothing to distribute, I will also award Steve Jobs with a Zoon for the whole two month “just kidding� iPhone pricing situation, although I might take half of it back if I get a $100 coupon that doesn’t force me to spend $500 to actually use it. So let that be a warning to you out there on the Tubes thinking about how to linkbait an article at the expense of the progress of technology. I have a rapid firing gun full of Zoons and I’m not shy about cranking them out. Be sure to post any nominees.What do you think? I really like to hear from readers. Comment in the Forum or email me with your ideas. Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast! Submit to Reddit or Slashdot, or consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!

  • Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

    Even more firms may gain access to TARP. Sources say the Treasury may use some of its $700B rescue fund to buy stakes in financing companies such as GE's (GE) GE Capital and CIT Group (CIT). Presently the program only includes publicly-traded banks and insurers, although the Treasury is already mulling opening the door to some privately-held firms. The U.S. government could eventually own even more of the American financial system than first envisioned. Yahoo, Google tone down ad tie-up. Yahoo (YHOO) and Google (GOOG) submitted a revised version of their search-ad pact to the Justice Department in the hope gaining approval. New provisions limit the scope of the deal, including shortening the agreement to two years from ten, and capping Yahoo's revenue from the deal to 25% of its search revenue total; previously there was no cap. The revised plan also gives Google advertisers the ability to opt out of having their ads displayed on Yahoo sites. It's unclear whether the changes will suffice to appease regulators who worry the deal will allow Google (GOOG) to monopolize online advertising. Separately, Yahoo said Monday Microsoft (MSFT) executive Jeff Dossett will take the lead position in its online media properties after veteran Scott Moore left "for other opportunities." UBS posts earnings, warnings. UBS (UBS) confirmed a Q3 profit of 296M Swiss francs ($256.3M) helped by credit and tax gains, with outflows of 49.3B francs from its wealth management unit and 34.4B francs from its asset management unit. The world's largest wealth manager, UBS had already reported much of its Q3 results last month when it announced a capital injection of 6B franc from the Swiss government and said it would unload $60B of risky assets into a central bank fund. UBS noted some positive client money flows in October, but warned 'difficult' market conditions would hurt fee-earning businesses and Q4 results would be weighed down by the accounting effects of transferring risky assets. Shares -2.6% premarket. Outlook sours for RBS. Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) abandoned its full-year profit forecast after it wrote-down £1B in October against assets connected to Lehman Brothers and Icelandic banks and as bad loans rose. It also posted £1.4B of markdowns in Q3 before new accounting rules allowed it to claim back £1.2B. CEO Stephen Hester said the latest writedowns, coming in addition to £5.9B in H1, show the bank has too much risk and could face a full-year loss. RBS is in line for a U.K. bailout, and the government could own up to 60% of the bank unless investors buy some of the £20B of stock to be issued later this year. Shares -14.9% premarket. Goldman hedge fund down $1B. A flagship Goldman Sachs (GS) hedge fund - Goldman Sachs Investment Partners - has lost almost $1B of its $6B since its launch in January, further evidence of the crisis facing the industry. "We anticipate that these results will lead to net outflows from the hedge fund industry," managers said, although GSIC itself imposed a two-year lock-in at inception. More than half of its 13% Q3 loss was on positions in commodities, basic materials, metals, mining, energy and agriculture. Tough 2009 for JPMorgan. JPMorgan (JPM) CEO Jamie Dimon told employees the firm faces "highly challenging conditions" in 2009, but sees a possible "strong recovery" in 2010. JPM's recent acquisitions of Bear Stearns and WaMu will improve performance in the "longer term," he said. Dimon warned Asia is "going to get worse than you think" as the tidal wave that began with a collapse of the U.S. mortgage market washes over it. Still, longer-term, he sees "very substantial natural growth" in the region. iPod master leaves Apple. Tony Fadell, one of the fathers of the iPod, is leaving Apple (AAPL) for personal reasons, sources say. Former IBM (IBM) executive Mark Papermaster will take his place. During Fadell's tenure, the iPod grew from a curiosity into a major cash cow; Apple sold 54.7M iPods during its most recent fiscal year. But growth has cooled off as saturation becomes a factor in many countries. Still, Apple shows no signs of giving up any of its 70% U.S. market share. Dismal October for automakers. General Motors (GM) said October was likely the auto industry's worst month since WWII after its sales plunged 45%, Ford's (F) fell 30%, Nissan's (NSANY) declined 33%, Honda's (HMC) dropped 25%, while Toyota's (TM) declined by 23%. GM marketing chief Mark LaNeve said he believes there's plenty of pent-up demand, "but until the credit markets open up and consumer confidence improves, the entire U.S. economy, and any industry like autos that relies on financing, will suffer." U.S. auto sales are now down 14.6% YTD. "It's weaker than we were anticipating," J.D. Power's Bob Schnorbus said, warning leaders should take heed: "The auto industry is important to the economy and it should not be taken too lightly." Manufacturing paints bleak picture. The ISM's Manufacturing index fell to 38.9 in October, its lowest level since 1982, and worse than the expected 41.5. The only industries reporting growth were apparel and leather & allied products. Petroleum & coal and nonmetallic mineral products led the laggards. The weaker than expected data increases the risk the current slump will outdo the recessions of 2001 and 1991. Companies are cutting back on investments and hiring as Q3 consumer spending plunged by 3.1% - the biggest decline in 28 years. The survey "indicates a significantly faster rate of decline in manufacturing when comparing October to September," ISM director Norbert Ore said. "It appears that manufacturing is experiencing significant demand destruction as a result of recent events." Prices also rose at a much slower rate: the price index plunged to 37 from 53.5 in September - the lowest level since December 2001. Export orders dropped for the first time in 70 months. September Construction Spending fell 0.3% from August's revised numbers, better than the expected 0.8% drop. Residential private construction -1.3%; non-residential +1.2%. Earnings: Before Open Ameren (AEE): Q3 EPS of $1.17 misses by $0.08. Revenue of $2.06B (+3.2%) vs. $2.29B. Sees full-year EPS of $2.80-3.00 vs. $3.01. Shares -5.3%. (PR) Archer Daniels Midland (ADM): FQ1 EPS of $1.63 vs. consensus of $0.69. Revenue of $21.16B (+65%) vs. $15.98B. (PR) Autodesk (ADSK): Sees Q3 EPS of $0.53-0.55 vs. $0.55 consensus and revenue of $604-607M vs $624M. "The sharp downturn of the global economy is substantially impacting our business... Demand for our products fell dramatically in October in all geographies as the financial crisis worsened. (PR) Cimarex Energy (XEC): Q3 EPS of $2.19 misses by $0.07. Revenue of $576.5M (+67.7%) vs. $568M. (PR) Dean Foods (DF): Q3 EPS of $0.28 misses by $0.03. Revenue of $3.19B (+2.5%) in-line. (PR) Emerson Electric (EMR): FQ4 EPS of $0.88 beats by $0.02. Revenue of $6.7B (+11.1%) in-line. (PR) GrafTech (GTI): Q3 EPS of $0.55 beats by $0.10. Revenue of $316M (+25.7%) vs. $303M. Shares +6.7%. (PR) HCP Inc. (HCP): Q3 FFO of $0.71/share beats by $0.05. Revenue of $270M vs. $242M. Sees full-year FFO of $2.38-2.42 vs. $2.29. (PR) Holly (HOC): Q3 EPS of $1.00 beats by $0.13. Revenue of $1.72B (+42.3%) in-line. (PR) Louisiana-Pacific (LPX): Q3 EPS of -$0.38 misses by $0.08. Revenue of $390M (-17.5%) in-line. (PR) Magna International (MGA): Q3 EPS of $0.17 vs. consensus of $0.90. Revenue of $5.53B (-9%) in-line. (PR) Marvel Entertainment (MVL): Q3 EPS of $0.64 beats by $0.19. Revenue of $182.5M (+47.7%) vs. $146M. Sees full-year EPS of $2.45-2.65 vs. $1.93 and 2009 EPS of $1.00-1.35 vs. $1.94. (PR) Myriad Genetics (MYGN): FQ1 EPS of $0.30 beats by $0.16. Revenue of $74M (+52.4%) vs. $70M. (PR) NiSource (NI): Q3 EPS of $0.03 in-line. Revenue of $1.42B (+11.8%) vs. $1.36B. (PR) PPL Corp. (PPL): Q3 EPS of $0.45 misses by $0.15. Sees full-year EPS of $2.00-2.05 vs. $2.29, and 2009 EPS of $1.60-1.90 vs. $2.17. "Many of the pressures that affected our results in 2008 also are expected to continue into 2009..." (PR) Rowan (RDC): Q3 EPS of $1.00 beats by $0.13. Revenue of $527M (+5%) vs. $540M. "Continuing weakness in capital markets and commodity prices will, eventually, affect customer demand for our products and services, though we have experienced little impact thus far." (PR) St. Joe (JOE): Q3 EPS of -$0.12 misses by $0.12. Revenue of $32.8M (-57.6%) vs. $47.3M. (PR) Talisman Energy (TLM): Q3 EPS of $0.72 beats by $0.08. Revenue of $2.82B (+50.9%) vs. $2.89B. (PR) Tenneco (TEN): Q3 EPS of $0.01 misses by $0.22. Revenue of $1.5B (-3.8%) in-line. (PR) Tenet Healthcare (THC): Q3 EPS of -$0.06 misses by $0.03. Revenue of $2.14B (+5.2%) vs. $2.21B. Shares +14.1%. (PR) W&T Offshore (WTI): Q3 EPS of $0.79 misses by $0.03. Revenue of $290M (+13.6%) vs. $276M. (PR) Earnings: Monday After Close Automatic Data Processing (ADP): FQ1 EPS of $0.54 beats by $0.04. Revenue of $2.18B (+9.5%) in-line. Shares -2.5%. (PR) Coldwater Creek (CWTR): Sees Q3 sales of $225M vs. $265M consensus, and EPS of -$0.07 to -$0.09 vs. $0.03 consensus. "The overall macro-economic environment has proven to be substantially more challenging than anticipated." Shares -5.9%. (PR) Comstock Resources (CRK): Q3 EPS of $1.20 beats by $0.20. Revenue of $169M (+103.7%) vs. $158M. (PR) Embraer (ERJ): Q3 EPS of $0.32 misses by $0.07. Revenue of $1.55B (+8.1%) vs. $1.63B. (PR) EOG Resources (EOG): Q3 EPS of $2.34 beats by $0.10. Revenue of $3.22B (+226.5%). Shares +1.9%. (PR) Forest Oil (FST): Q3 EPS of $1.26 misses by $0.12. Revenue of $474M (+51.5%) vs. $465M. (PR) Herbalife (HLF): Q3 EPS of $0.89 beats by $0.03. Revenue of $M in-line. Sees Q4 EPS of $0.65-0.70 vs. $0.91, and 2009 EPS of $3.50-3.55 vs. $3.71. Shares -13.5%. (PR) MasterCard (MA): Q3 EPS of $2.47 beats by $0.22. Revenue of $1.34B (+23.7%) vs. $1.27B. Gross dollar volume rose 12.3%. "As we are not immune from the long-term effects of the current economic environment, we have significantly accelerated the focus on our cost structure..." Shares +8%. (PR) Mohawk Industries (MHK): Q3 EPS of $1.10 misses by $0.02. Revenue of $1.76B (-9%) in-line. (PR) Open Text (OTEX): Q3 EPS of $0.53 beats by $0.03. Revenue of $183M (+11.4%) vs. $179M. Shares -1.1%. (PR) Pepco Holdings (POM): Q3 EPS of $0.59 misses by $0.11. Revenue of $3.06B (+10.4%) vs. $2.73B. (PR) Pitney Bowes (PBI): Q3 EPS of $0.67 misses by $0.03. Revenue of $1.55B (+2.6%) vs. $1.6B. Sees full-year EPS of $2.75-2.82 vs. $2.85. (PR) St. Mary Land (SM): Q3 EPS of $1.20 beats by $0.08. Revenue of $324M (+31.4%) vs. $329M. Shares +1.2%. (PR) Viacom (VIA): Q3 EPS of $0.62 beats by $0.07. Revenue of $3.41B (+4.2%) vs. $3.32B. Shares +1.5%. (PR) Today's Markets Asia closed mixed Tuesday. Tokyo was the standout, +6.27% to 9,115. Shanghai -0.76% to 1,707. Hang Seng +0.28% to 14,384. BSE Sensex +2.84% to 10,631. European markets posted strong morning gains. London +1.75%. Paris +2.1%. Frankfurt +2%. U.S. futures are markedly higher at 7:00 AM. Dow +1.88% to 9506. S&P +1.96% to 988.50. Nasdaq +2.18%. Crude +1.16% to $64.65. Gold +1.49% to $737.60. Tuesday's Economic Calendar 7:45 ICSC Retail Store Sales8:55 Redbook10:00 Factory Orders5:00 PM ABC Consumer Confidence Index Notable earnings before Tuesday's open: ADM, AEE, AMSC, DF, DNR, EMR, ENTG, EXPD, FE, GTI, HCP, HL, HNT, HOC, JEC, JOE, LPX, MAC, MGA, MYGN, NI, NNN, NXG, PPL, PQ, RDC, TDC, TEN, THC, TLM, VNO, WTI, XEC Notable earnings after Tuesday's close: AMMD, BRE, CBL, DCT, FCH, HRP, JKHY, ME, NHP, PXD, UPL, USU, VTR Seeking Alpha editor Rachael Granby contributed to this post. Get Wall Street Breakfast by email -- it's free and takes only seconds to sign up. After you finish reading Wall Street BreakfastSeeking Alpha's Market Currentswill keep you current all day long.

  • TUAW Talkcast #21: Should Auld Acquaintance...

    Filed under: TUAW Business, PodcastsOur final TUAW talkcast of 2007 was a super-sized affair, with a big bunch of bloggers (including the overseas presence of Nik Fletcher and the introduction of Brett Terpstra) and predictions, favorites and top story of the year picks, crammed into an ample 1:15 of audio fun. Download the show directly or from Talkshoe, play it from the Flash player in the continuation of this post, if you like, or pick it up on iTunes. To give you some Dashboard goodness, Cory has whipped up a widget to allow you to play any of our shows -- try it out if you're in the mood.Don't forget to join us again this Sunday at our usual 10pm ET timeslot, and then the following Sunday we'll be shifting earlier (exact time TBD) for the kickoff of our Macworld Expo coverage.Continue reading TUAW Talkcast #21: Should Auld Acquaintance...Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Apple's iPhone Heads for Europe

    With Apple (AAPL) self-imposed deadline of Sept. 30 rapidly approaching and a mysterious press event scheduled for Tuesday Sept. 18 in London, the rumor sites have fallen into line and concluded that Steve Jobs is finally set to unveil his plans for rolling out the iPhone across the pond, as CFO Peter Oppenheimer promised last July. For the phones themselves, Europeans will have to wait a little longer -- probably until November. Much of what Apple will announce in the next two weeks is hardly a secret anymore. FT Deutschland reported in August that the company had signed contracts with three European cellular network operators -- T-Mobile in Germany, Orange in France and O2 in the UK -- that included a 10% kickback to Apple on revenue collected from iPhone calls and data transfers. Since then reports have surfaced almost daily to flesh out the details, including the image at left that purports to be an ad for a 16 GB German iPhone priced at 499 euros ($692). The ad may well be a fake, but the price corresponds with the most authoritative rumor to date, Reuters' report on Friday that Deutsche Telekom's T-Mobile unit will sell the iPhone in Germany for an initial price of 399 euros ($554). Presumably that's the price for an 8GB model. Although Reuters' source predicted that the T-Mobile deal would be announced this coming week, Apple has not yet issued press invitations in Germany. The event in London -- cryptically entitled "Mum is no longer the world" --  is to be held at 10 a.m. local time at the Apple store on Regent Street, a surprisingly modest venue for what most observers expect will be the O2 announcement. The Apple Expo in Paris, which runs from September 25 to 29, would seem a more propitious time for Steve Jobs to share his iPhones plans for Continental Europe. The only suspense left may be when the phones start shipping and whether they will sell. Peter Oppenheimer in July said only that Apple was on track to start shipping iPhones to Europe before the end of the year, which hasn't stopped the rumor sites from putting their chips on earlier dates. On Friday Think Secret cited "fresh information" suggesting that the phone would arrive in the U.K. during the week of November 12, in France "around November 29" and in Germany "some time in November." If the German advertisement is to be believed, Europeans could see 16 GB iPhones before Americans do. Early speculation that the new devices would run on Europe's 3G networks has largely been dismissed, leading some analysts to suggest that a 2.5G iPhone might be received by cellphone sophisticates on the Continent with a yawn. But the eagerness with which Apple enthusiasts abroad have been snapping up iUnlock and other programs that free the phone to work in Europe suggest that there might be quite a bit of pent-up demand.

The Comments Go Here

Software Releases