Facebook reignites the fires of its Workplace unit

Facebook has announced its challenge to the video-conferencing segment and a reignition of its venture into the world of collaboration and productivity.

Back in 2016, Workplace by Facebook was announced, an attempt to diversify the Silicon Valley giants output and create a starting point to work with enterprise organisations in way outside of advertising. Much was made of the launch at the time, but it effectively dwindled away into irrelevance over the years as profits failed to materialise.

While none of the senior executives have paid much attention to the business unit, Workplace is very rarely mentioned by the likes of Mark Zuckerberg, it has been bundling along in the background. After starting to charge customers for the service in October 2017, Workplace now has more than 5 million paid users, a fraction of rivals but it is admirable for a business unit which has not been given much attention or praise.

Last night would appear to be the relaunch of efforts to crack into a new market, capitalising on remote working trends being forced onto companies of all sizes around the world.

“The coronavirus crisis has forced us to rethink how we work,” said Julien Codorniou, VP of Workplace at Facebook. “Changes expected to happen over several years have happened in just a couple of months. And what many companies have realised is that it’s not about where your people are, but whether they are connected and informed.

“At Workplace we believe strongly that video will be central to the future of work – enabling companies to maintain community, while exploring the opportunities and diversity that flexible working can offer.”

This is of course a very relevant trend for today and could be even more so moving forward. 84% of Telecoms.com readers believed the work from home trend would continue following the relaxation of societal lockdowns, meaning at least some elements of the coerced digital transformation projects which have been sprint through today will remain in place.

Facebook might not be getting in on the ground floor of this trend, but the prior existence of Workplace and the power of the Facebook brand should be enough for it to muscle some benefits and business of the likes of Microsoft Teams, Slack, Zoom and various other businesses which are so richly benefitting from today’s adverse conditions.

As part of this latest push into the enterprise space, ‘Rooms’ has been introduced as a video conferencing feature, Live Video Improvements allows for Town Hall style engagements, Workplace on Portal likes the enterprise push with its consumer IOT gamble, Oculus for Business ties VR into the mix and Work Groups is a productivity and management toolset.

Overall, it is a solid effort to bring a broad set of functionality and features into a single offering, with the opportunity to tie into other emerging elements of the Facebook business. The first attempt to muscle into this market in 2016 might not have been very successful, but this one should certainly be taken more seriously by rivals.


Telecoms.com Daily Poll:

Can the sharing economy (ride-sharing, short-stay accommodation etc.) survive COVID-19?

Loading ... Loading ...

AR/VR investments declined during 2019

Each year seems to be the year for virtual and augmented reality, but analyst firm Digi-Capital is now reporting investments have declined below the levels reported in 2017 and 2018.

Although it is still too early for the VR and AR neigh sayers to strut around too pompously, it is not the most encouraging of signs. The issue seems to be investments made in the continuously embryonic segment made in the final three months of the year.

The levels of investment in 2019 were still the third largest annual sum to date, though it was 35% lower compared to 2018, down to $4.1 billion. Digi-Capital has been measuring the success of the segment in terms of deal volume (number of deals) and deal value (dollars invested).

“While there could be an uptick in AR/VR M&A activity if a market inflection point happens in coming years, there isn’t an obvious catalyst for large-scale M&A in the short term,” the firm said in a blog post.

The prospects of virtual and augmented reality are worth keeping an eye on, as there is always a chance of a revolutionary impact on areas such as gaming, entertainment, training or video conferencing, but once again the segment is failing to live up to the promise. Q4 was the problem period for the segment, a single quarter, which does offer a glimmer of hope.

The biggest deal attributed to this sector over the course of 2019 was attributed to Snap, with the firm aiming to raise $1 billion in convertible senior notes. The funds were lined up to be used for working capital, operating expenses and capital expenditures, as well as potentially repurchasing common stock and for acquisitions.

Interestingly enough, a slow-down in the investment category of this segment could see a dramatic shift in the way it functions. Should investments continue to drop, start-ups might need to focus on revenue generation and managing burn rates. Without seed money and continued investments, the quality of products might suffer as firms are forced into go-to market strategies sooner than anticipated.

However, you have to remember this is only a short period of time and not necessarily a death sentence to the segment. Perhaps this is a bit of credibility for those who have been less than enthused by VR and AR for some time, you correspondent being one of them.

Facebook sets out to create its own OS

Facebook has reportedly hired ex-Microsoft employee Mark Lucovsky to oversee the development of its own operating system to reduce the dependence on Google’s Android.

While many have tried and failed to muscle in on the Android dominance in the OS world, Facebook has largely sat back to benefit from the success of Google. That said, according to The Information, in hiring the man who co-authored the Windows NT operating system Facebook is attempting to break-free of the Android shackles.

Although there is no official confirmation from the social media giant, it does make sense. Facebook is not going to be fighting Android for a share of the mobile OS segment, though it allegedly wants more control of its own fate when it comes to the Portal and Oculus portfolios.

“We really want to make sure the next generation has space for us,” Facebook’s Head of Hardware Andrew Bosworth said during the interview.

“We don’t think we can trust the marketplace or competitors to ensure that’s the case. And so we’re gonna do it ourselves.”

With the Portal smart home devices, VR head Oculus and AR glasses codenamed Orion, Facebook is creeping more and more into the physical world. It might not be the traditional stomping group for Zucks and co. though these are emerging environments where the rules have not been written yet.

What is worth noting is this is not the first time Facebook has attempted to create an OS. In 2013, Facebook launched an OS which ran on some HTC phones, but it should not be under-emphasised how much of a disaster this way. It was a catastrophic failure.

However, the playing field is slightly different now. This is not an OS which is trying to replicate the Android experience on mobile, Facebook is attempting to define its own experience on these devices and dictate its own product development cycle.

Verizon buys into alternative realities

Verizon has announced the acquisition of Jaunt XR, adding augmented and virtual reality smarts to its media division.

While few details about the deal have been unveiled, the deal will add an extra element to a division which has been under considerable pressure in recent months. The Verizon diversification efforts have proven to be less than fruitful to date, though this appears to be another example of throwing money at a disastrous situation.

“We are thrilled with Verizon’s acquisition of Jaunt’s technology,” said Mitzi Reaugh, CEO of Jaunt XR. “The Jaunt team has built leading-edge software and we are excited for its next chapter with Verizon.”

Jaunt XR will join the troubled media division of Verizon which has been under strain in recent months. The ambition was to create a competitor to Google and Facebook to secure a slice of the billions of dollars spent on digital advertising. On the surface it is a reasonable strategy, but like so many good ideas, the execution was somewhat wanting.

Since the acquisition of Yahoo, Verizon has had to deal with the after-effects of a monumental data breach, write off $4.6 billion of the money it spent on the transaction, spend big to secure a distribution deal with the NFL and cut 7% of its staff. The first few years of living the digital advertising dream has been nothing short of a nightmare.

Looking at the financials, during the last quarter the media division reported $1.8 billion in revenues. This was down 2.9% from the previous year and accounted for only 2% of the total revenues brought in across the group.

With Jaunt XR brought into the media family, new elements could be introduced to the portfolio. Details have not been offered just yet, though with VR, and more recently, AR expertise, there is an opportunity to create immersive, engaging content for the mobile-orientated aspects of the business.

This transaction will certainly add variety and depth to the services and products in the media portfolio, but soon enough you have to question whether Verizon is throwing good money after bad. This has not been a fruitful venture for the team thus far.

IBC 2019: Interactive takes centre stage as VR shuffles to side lines

Every couple of years there seems to be a massive resurgence for the promise of virtual reality before it is cast to the shadows. This year, interactive content took the limelight from VR.

This is not to say VR and augmented reality wasn’t present at IBC in Amsterdam. Throughout the exhibition halls you could see plenty of headsets and software to build the immersive environment, but on the conference stage it was barely mentioned.

The main stage is the business-end of almost every conference; it a technology or company isn’t a headliner, the ‘also-ran’ category list has gotten a bit longer. This is the conundrum which VR and AR has found itself in; there are some interesting technologies and discussions going on, but the most important people are talking about something else.

AR is progressing very quickly from the pale imitation which captured the imagination through the Pokémon Go app, but the illusive business case continues to frustrate. That said, an important trend which was evident through several sessions was interactive content.

This is an area which looks genuinely exciting. Everything from ‘Bandersnatch’ on Netflix, through to personalisation of sports content (selecting a commentator or parallel content) or Celebrity Big Brother, where users can select the camera they want to view and create their own viewing experience and story to follow. This is the next stage of content, and it is immediately more realistic than some of the blue-sky thinking ideas which are scattered throughout the exhibition halls.

Of course, this should not really be that much of a surprise. The idea of interactive or supplementary content being built into platforms is just one step along from how many younger generations consume content today. It isn’t a single point of consumption, its multiple screens, complimentary experiences and a variety of simultaneous touch-points.

Research from YuMe and Nielsen suggests the trend for adults who use their smartphone or laptop while watching TV content is increasing each year. For 2018, 187.3 million US adults admitted to using multiple screens simultaneously, up 6.4% from the year before. Users want more ways to engage with content and building interactive opportunities into content platforms is certainly one way to apply this trend in the real-world.

HTC debuts eye-tracking with enterprise VR launch

HTC has announced it is bringing its enterprise VR product to North America, after teasing executives at CES in January.

The product itself, Vive Pro Eye, is not cheap, $1,599, but features the latest in eye tracking technology with HTC claiming it is ‘setting a new standard’ for VR in the enterprise market. While the consumer VR segment has been relatively sluggish, despite the incredible promises made by technologists, though there does seem to be a bigger focus on enterprise in recent months.

The Vive Pro Eye follows up HTC’s Vive Pro which is already in the hands of various different enterprise customers throughout the world, introducing new features such as precision eye tracking software, deeper data analysis, new training environments and more intuitive user experiences.

And while some of the features might be considered excessive at the moment, there is always the potential to influence mainstream adoption.

“We’ve invested in VR technology to connect our fans to our game and deliver a new level of engagement through VR game competitions and in-ballpark attractions,” said Jamie Leece, SVP of Games and VR for Major League Baseball.

“By integrating eye tracking technology into Home Run Derby VR, we are able to transport this immersive baseball experience to any location without additional controllers needed. Our fans can simply operate menus by using their eyes.”

This is perhaps where the VR industry has fallen short of expectations over the first few years; cash conscious consumers do not have the funds to fulfil the promise. These are after all individuals who have been stung by various difference financial potholes over the last decade and might be hesitant to invest so handsomely in such an unproven technology.

The focus on enterprise is a much more sensible bet for many of the VR enthusiasts to follow. Firstly, in working with organizations like Major League Baseball, new applications can be created, and experiential experiences can be offered to consumers at the games. This might have a normalising impact for the technology on the mass market.

Secondly, there is a lot more money in the enterprise world than in the individual’s wallet, with decision makers much more enthusiastic about investments when it isn’t linked directly to their bank accounts.

Finally, there are more usecases in the enterprise world. Some of them might be boring, but they are realistic and important for the companies involved. Training exercises are an excellent example.

What this product also bringing into the equation is eye-tracking software, offering an entirely new element for developers to consider.

“Our virtual venues come to life as individual audience members can react with various animations when a user makes direct eye contact with them,” said Jeff Marshall, CEO of Ovation, a company which uses VR to help media train customers in public speaking environments.

“As a developer, there’s just no going back once you’ve seen all that eye tracking makes possible.”

From an experience perspective, the eye-tracking software can also add to the gaming world. Foveated rendering is a graphics-rendering technique which uses an eye tracker integrated which helps reduce rendering workload by reducing the image quality in the peripheral vision. By focusing processing power where it is needed most, the strain placed on the device and experience is lessened.

Many have suggested this technology could be at the forefront of the next generation of VR devices, both in the consumer and enterprise world. Whether this is enough to force the potential of VR from promise to reality remains to be seen, but something needs to be done.

Is the VR market primed to pluck?

For all the promise of virtual reality (VR) the consumer appetite remains as somewhat of an unknown. Theoretically the technology could revolutionise the entertainment space, but we’re currently in a bit of a waiting game.

HTC is ready to gamble the consumer appetite, supporting ecosystem and product portfolio has evolved to such a position to provide the fuel for a subscription-based library of premium VR content.

“We have built a new model for VR that shines a light on the great library of VR content this industry has developed and gives users a reason to spend more time in headset than ever before,” said Rikard Steiber, President of Viveport.

“At the same time, we’re increasing developer reach and potential revenue as more developers can monetize a single Infinity user. We believe this model matches how consumers want to experience VR”

In pursuit of simplicity, Viveport is effectively a ‘Netflix for VR’. Customers can either pay $12.99 a month or $99 a year to access a VR content library with more than 600 titles already listed. As with other subscription models such as Netflix for content and Spotify for music, customers will have unlimited access to all content hosted on the platform.

However, you still have to answer the question as to whether the VR segment is ready to deliver the much-anticipated riches.

For the profits to be made, three criteria have to be satisfied. Firstly, is there an ecosystem which is creating enough volume of content, wide enough variety and immersive enough experiences. Secondly, is the hardware priced to allow the opportunity to generate mass market penetration. And finally, is there enough demand from the consumer.

With 600 titles already listed on the platform, this would suggest there is a large enough ecosystem in place to create the content. HTC is promising more titles, as well as some co-ordinated launches such as ‘Angry Birds VR: Isle of Pigs’. Secondly, the price of VR headsets has been coming down recently, and while it is still expensive, it is not prohibitively so. Consumers can spend thousands at the top end, but then again Google Daydream View can be purchased for £69. The breadth of products is now available to make this segment potentially viable.

The final criterion is the consumer appetite. This is incredibly difficult to gauge without launching a product, but as long as there are early adopters it is a good time to launch. Let’s not forget, Netflix was not an immediate success, it took time to develop the monstrous subscription base it has today, but it steadily attracted more and more thanks to it being first to market, while also offering an affordable (and very good) experience. Much of this was done through word of mouth.

Another lesson which HTC will have to learn is that enough is never enough. Netflix has maintained it position as the leader in the content world because it is constantly driving for more. Last year, the team spend almost $8 billion on content acquisition and creation, a number which will drastically increase this year. Not only is Netflix funding bigger-budget productions, but it is also expanding the local content libraries around the world. With Viveport, HTC could do the same, but it needs to ensure it is constantly expanding.

HTC has crafted itself a leadership position in the VR world, and the raw materials are currently in place to make this a profitable segment. Add improved connectivity with fibre penetration increasing and 4G constantly improving to the above three criteria, and HTC could be onto a winner.

Who knows, maybe in a few years’ time we’ll be referencing Viveport as the heavyweight of the entertainment space, not Netflix.

Premier League giants take baby steps toward digital economy

If you’ve ever been on any sports’ club website you would be forgiven for thinking these guys are technophobes, but Intel is predicting a new era for sports broadcasting and fan engagement.

“We’re going to find ourselves in a couple of years’ time looking back and wondering how we ever got by,” said XXX of Intel.

The sports industry, and football in particular, has never really been at the forefront of technology. For an industry which defines itself, and almost entirely depends, on fan engagement little has been done to embrace new technologies and ideas. However, the last couple of years have seen a few rays of hope.

A couple of the more innovative clubs in the football industry, ones who just so happened to be partners of Intel, featured on a panel session to discuss the glaringly obvious opportunities which are being presented to sport clubs and the progress being made in shifting incredibly traditional businesses.

“We have been seeing a convergence of technology and sport and this has been accelerating over the last few years,” said Damian Willoughby, SVP Partnerships at Manchester City FC.

“Technology is impacting all of us and from our perspective, we are looking at how we can create fan engagement or fan experience, whether it is at Anfield or anywhere around the world,” said Billy Hogan, Chief Commercial Officer at Liverpool.

“What isn’t changing is the popularity of the English Premier League,” said Peter Silverstone, Commercial Director of Arsenal. “What is changing is the consumer appetite for how they consume the English Premier League as a product.”

What you have to take into consideration, and why it is so baffling that football clubs and the industry on the whole have been so slow to react to new technologies, is the global reach. The English Premier League (EPL) official Facebook and Twitter pages have 42 million and 18 million followers respectively. Another 23 million follow the competition on Instagram.

Below you can see the social media reach of each of the clubs on show during the event:

Club Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube
Liverpool 32.2 million 11 million 12.4 million 1.1 million
Arsenal 36.9 million 14 million 13.3 million 1.1 million
Man City 36.7 million 6.6 million 10.4 million 1.6 million

This is a truly global industry and while these numbers are certainly impressive, the challenge now is how to best capitalise on such significant assets. This is where the Intel partnership and content play a role.

As all three of the executives point out, the idea behind technology implementation is to offer a greater variety of ways for fans to consume content. This might be through virtual reality, player POV footage, more in-depth analysis, behind the scenes content or partners stories. The idea is to create content which came be customisable, interactive and varied. Each user can create their own story on-demand, building interactions which are more suited to them.

Looking at Intel’s True View product, one of the technologies which will be used to deliver this enhanced experience, XXX highlighted 38 5K sensors will be installed in each stadium, allowing the team to capture footage which is eight times the definition of HD. The cameras capture volumetric data (height, width, and depth) using voxels, a 3D pixel, delivering a new experience for the consumer.

Collecting this data will allow the three clubs to introduce 360 degrees replays, allowing the consumer to decide how the content is viewed, player POV footage and new content on laser wall screens. Intel believe this sort of technology is addressing a supply/demand chasm in the market; consumers are demanding a different type of experience, yet few in the world of sports seem able to deliver it.

Creating all of these experiences has another excellent impact on these clubs; it allows them to match the globalised nature of football. The worldwide footprint of the Premier League is pretty unmatched in the entirety of sports, especially over the last decade with clubs targeting fans on distant shores. These are three clubs which have certainly fit this mould.

“Some of these people will never get the chance to go to Anfield, but we can deliver this experience,” said Hogan, referencing fans in Indonesia, China and the US.

Although there certainly have been positive steps forward in converging the worlds of technology and sport, this is only the beginning. Looking forward, there are some genuinely exciting technologies in the pipeline, each of which has the potential to completely revolutionise the experience.

Virtual reality is one which is constantly discussed, and while there might be some applications and hardware on the market which offer some sort of experience, this is only the tip of the iceberg. VR is very much an embryonic technology for the moment, though the fast decreasing price of hardware and the approaching 5G euphoria could take this technology to the next level.

Another area to consider is the delivery of content through holograms. A couple of months back Vodafone delivered one of the best 5G demos we’ve seen, live-streaming a hologram from Manchester to its Newbury HQ of England Women’s football captain Steph Houghton. The image was crisp while latency was pretty much non-existent. Slumbering journalists very bolted upright by genuine innovation.

Imagine sitting in your living room and experiencing a Premier League Football game as if you were sat on the halfway line and seeing replays through the eyes of the players. Or how about a boxing match hosted in Las Vegas, but live-streaming holograms to hundreds of venues throughout the world. The viewing experience could be completely revolutionised.

What these three clubs are doing are the first baby steps into digital transformation, a buzzword which has plagued us for years. However, it might not be too long before the sports entertainment world morphs into a completely unrecognisable beast.

Apple turns to gaming to crack subscription conundrum – sources

Apple has been searching far and wide for alternative revenue streams to reduce its reliance on the plateauing devices market, and the latest venture might take it into the world of gaming.

With content being an incredible bust for the business, Apple is reportedly in hot pursuit of the blossoming gaming segment. This is an area which would seemingly tick all the boxes for the iLeader; recurring revenues, a chance to grow organically and in before the segment has become popular and saturated.

According to Cheddar, Apple is in discussions to create a gaming platform which would bundle various titles together behind a paywall. It sounds like it could be a Netflix for gamers and would certainly give the status quo of gaming a bit of a poke.

Looking at the gaming segment, this is an area which is becoming increasing popular with users while profitability is certainly heading in the right direction for the developers and platform owners. There is already a lot of money flowing around this space, but as more games evolve away from single- to multi-player, internet focused experiences, popularity seems to be growing in the mainstream markets.

Recent figures from the Entertainment Retailers Association (ERA) in the UK suggest gaming now accounts for just over 51% of the three segments in the entertainment world (video and music being the other two), doubling in revenues since 2007. Netflix and Amazon have proven the subscription OTT segment has legs, normalised the idea in the mind of the consumer, so why shouldn’t a gaming platform work as well.

Of course, for this to work Apple would have to convince the developers to join hands behind the paywall. This is where Apple’s venture into the world of content has failed before; it didn’t create good enough content to be considered a realistic player. This will certainly be a big change in the status quo for the developers and it will be interesting to see what the results are. Apple not only needs high quality content, but a broad enough portfolio to make it value for money.

Here is where Apple is swimming against the tide. Single purchases might have been the way developers made money in the past, but the popular route is now free-to-play with in-game purchasing options. It has proven to be very successful and there might be some resistance to move to another business model. Don’t fix what isn’t broken might be a relevant phrase here. What Apple is suggesting in a completely new approach to revenue sharing as the games are bundled together behind a paywall. Theoretically it can work but change scares the majority.

If Apple can balance the equation, it would certainly be a relief for CEO Tim Cook who must be feeling some pressure right now. A less than enthusiastic earnings call demonstrated Apple is floundering in the software and services segment. Yes, it is growing, but not at the rate of knots which Apple investors have come to expect. Apple hasn’t really done anything exciting or applaudable in this segment yet, most of the gains are through iTunes or Apple Care for example; differentiation and diversification are desired above all else.

Apple is certainly stepping out of its comfort zone here, and we strongly suspect it might fail because of this. However, it might just lead the way for a fast follower (Netflix perhaps?) to reap the rewards.

In fairness though, you have to give Apple credit for creative thinking and an interesting idea. Those recurring revenues might not be that far away for the iGiant.

Who’s got the stones to buy Netflix?

Apple, Disney, Microsoft or Apple; one of the biggest questions which has circled the technology industry over the last couple of years is who could possibly acquire Netflix?

The streaming giant, Wall Street’s darling, has almost constantly been talked up as an acquisition target. However, another year has passed and it’s another year where no-one managed to capture the content beast. You have to start to wonder whether it will ever happen, but here we’re going to have a look at who might be in the running.

Netflix numbersWith subscriptions totalling more than 148 million, 2018 revenues exceeding $15.7 billion and operating income up to $1.6 billion, Netflix would certainly be a useful addition to any company. However, with market capitalisation now roughly $143 billion and debt which would make your eyes water, an acquisition would be a scary prospect for almost everyone.

First and foremost, let’s have a look at some of the players who might have been in the equation, but alas, no more.

Disney has been a rumoured acquirer for almost as long as Netflix existed. This is an incredibly successful company, but no-one is immune to the shift tides of the global economy and consumer behaviour. Getting in on the internet craze is something which should be considered critical to Disney, and Netflix would have given them a direct-to-consumer channel. However, there was always a feeling Disney would develop its own proposition organically and this turned out to be the case.

AT&T is another company which might have been in the fray, but its Time Warner acquisition satisfied the content needs of the business. All telcos are searching to get in on the content cash, developing converged offerings, and AT&T is a company which certainly has a big bank account. As mentioned above, the acquisition of Time Warner completes rules this business out.

There are of course others who might have been interested in acquiring the streaming giant, but for various reasons they would not be considered today. Either it would be way too expensive, wouldn’t fit into the company’s objectives or there is already a streaming service present. But now onto the interesting stuff, who could be in the running.

Microsoft logo

Microsoft

From doom to gloom, CEO Satya Nadella has certainly turned fortunes around at Microsoft. Only a few years ago, Microsoft was a shadow of its former self as the declining PC industry hit home hard. A disastrous venture into the world of smartphones was a slight detour but under the cloud-orientated leadership of Nadella, Microsoft is back as a lean, mean tech heavyweight.

Alongside the cloud computing business, Microsoft has also successfully lead the Xbox brand into the digital era. Not only is the platform increasingly evolving into an online gaming landscape, but it also lends itself well to sit alongside the Netflix business. If Microsoft wants to compete with Amazon across the entire digital ecosystem, both consumer and enterprise, it will need to expand the business into more consumer channels.

For Netflix, this might be an interesting tie up as well. Netflix is a business which operates through a single revenue stream at the moment, entertainment, and might be keen to look at new avenues. Gaming and eSports are two segments which align well with Netflix, opening up some interesting synergies with Microsoft’s consumer business.

“Microsoft is at a crossroads,” said independent telco, media and tech analyst Paolo Pescatore. “Its rivals have made big moves in video and it needs to follow suit. The acquisition addresses this and complements its efforts with Xbox. The move also strengthens its growing aspirations in the cloud with Azure, firmly positioning itself against Amazon with AWS and Prime video.”

However, while this is a company which could potentially afford to buy Netflix, you have to wonder whether it actually will. The Netflix culture does not necessarily align with Microsoft, and while diversification into new channels is always attractive, it might be considered too much of a distraction from the cloud computing mission. Nadella has already stated he is targeting the edge computing and AI segments, and considering the bounties on offer there, why bother entertaining an expensive distraction.

Apple Store on 5th Avenue, New York City

Apple

Apple is another company which has billions floating in free cash and assets which could be used to leverage any transaction. It is also a company which has struggled to make any effective mark on the content world, excluding iTunes success. With Netflix, Apple could purchase a very successful brand, broadening the horizons of the business.

The last couple of months have shown Apple is not immune to the dampened smartphone trends. Sales are not roaring the same way they were during yesteryear, perhaps because there has been so little innovation in the segment for years. The last genuine disruption for devices probably came from Apple a decade ago when it ditched the keyboard. Arguably everything else has just been incremental change, while prices are sky-rocketing; the consumer feels abused.

To compensate for the slowdown, CEO Tim Cook has been talking up the software and services business unit. While this has been successful, it seems not enough for investors. Netflix would offer a perfect opportunity for Apple to diversify and tap into the recurring revenues pot which everyone wants to grab.

However, Netflix is a service for anyone and everyone. Apple has traditionally tied services into Apple devices. At CES, we saw the firm expand into openness with new partnerships, but this might be a step too far. Another condemning argument is Apple generally likes to build business organically, or at least acquire to bolster existing products. This would stomp all over this concept.

Alibaba Logo

Alibaba

A Chinese company which has been tearing up trees in the domestic market but struggled to impose itself on the international space, Alibaba has been hoping to replicate the Huawei playbook to dominate the world, but no-where near as successfully.

Perhaps an internationally renowned business is exactly what Alibaba needs to establish itself on the international space. But what is worth noting is this relationship could head the other direction as well; Netflix wouldn’t mind capitalising on the Chinese market.

As with any international business a local business partner is needed to trade in China. Alibaba, with its broad reach across the vast country, could prove to be a very interesting playmate. With Netflix’s Eastern ambitions and Alibaba’s Western dreams, there certainly is dovetail potential.

However, it is very difficult to believe the current US political administration would entertain this idea. Aside from aggression and antagonistic actions, the White House has form in blocking acquisitions which would benefit China, see Broadcom’s attempted acquisition of Qualcomm. This is a completely different argument and segment but considering the escalating trade war between the US and China, it is hard to see any tie up between these two internet giants.

Google Logo

Google

If you’re going to talk about a monstrous acquisition in Silicon Valley, it’s difficult not to mention Google. This is one of the most influential and successful businesses on the planet with cash to burn. And there might just be interest in acquiring Netflix.

Time and time again, Google has shown it is not scared of spending money, a prime example of this is the acquisition of YouTube for $1.65 billion. This might seem like pocket change today, but back in 2006 this was big cash. It seemed like a ridiculous bet for years, but who is laughing now?

The issue with YouTube is the business model. Its advertiser led, open to all and recently there have been some PR blunders with the advert/content alignment. Some content companies have actively avoided the platform, while attempts to create a subscription business have been unsuccessful. This is where Netflix could fit in.

“Google has made numerous failed attempts to crack the paid online video landscape,” said Pescatore. “Content and media owners no longer want to devalue their prized assets by giving it away on YouTube. Acquiring Netflix gives Google a sizeable subscriber base and greater credibility with content and media owners.”

Where there is an opportunity to make money, Google is not scared about big cash outlays. Yes, Netflix is a massive purchase, and there is a lot of debt to consider, but Google is an adventurous and bold enough company to make this work.

However, you have to question whether the US competition authorities would allow two of the largest content platforms to be owned by the same company. There might not necessarily be any direct overlap, but this is a lot of influence to have in one place. Authorities don’t generally like this idea.

Verizon Logo

Verizon

Could Verizon borrow a page from the AT&T playbook and go big on a content acquisition? Perhaps it will struggle to justify the expense to investors, but this one might make sense.

Verizon has been attempting to force its way into the diversification game and so far, it has been a disaster. While AT&T bought Game of Thrones, Verizon went after Yahoo to challenge the likes of Google and Facebook for advertising dollars. A couple of data breaches later, the content and media vision looks like a shambles. Hindsight is always 20/20 but this was a terrible decision.

However, with a 5G rollout to consider, fixed broadband ambitions and burnt fingers from the last content acquisition, you have to wonder whether the team has the stomach to take on such a massive task. Verizon as a business is nothing like Netflix and despite the attractive recurring revenues and value-add opportunities, the integration would be a nightmare. The headache might not be worth the reward.

You also have to wonder whether the telco would be scared off by some of the bold decisions made from a content perspective. Telcos on the whole are quite risk-adverse organizations, something which Netflix certainly isn’t. How many people would have taken a risk and funded content like Stranger Things? And with the release of Bandersnatch, Netflix is entering the new domain of interactive content. You have to be brave and accept considerable risk to make such bets work; we can’t see Verizon adopting this mentality.

Softbank Logo

Softbank Vision Fund

Another with telco heritage, but this is a completely different story.

A couple of years back, Softbank CEO Masayoshi Son had a ridiculous idea which was mocked by many. The creation of a $100 billion investment fund which he would manage seemed unimaginable, but he found the backers, made it profitable and then started up a second-one.

Son is a man to knows how to make money and has the right connections to raise funds for future wonderful ideas. Buying Netflix might sound like an absurd idea, but this is one place we could really see it working.

However, the issue here is the business itself. While Son might be interested in digital ventures which are capable of making profits, the aim of the funds have mainly been directed towards artificial intelligence. Even if Son and his team have bought into other business segments, they are more enterprise orientated. There are smaller bets which have been directed towards the consumer market, but would require an investment on another level.

Tencent Logo

Tencent

Another Chinese company which has big ambitions on the global stage.

This is a business which has been incredibly successful in the Chinese market and used assets effectively in the international markets as well. The purchase of both Epic Games and Supercell have spread the influence of the business further across the world and numerous quarterly results have shown just how strong Tencent’s credentials are in the digital economy.

Tencent would most likely be able to raise the funds to purchase the monster Netflix, while the gaming and entertainment portfolio would work well alongside the streaming brand. Cross selling would be an option, as would embedding more varied content on different platforms. It could be a match made in heaven.

However, you have to bear in mind this is a Chinese company and the political climate is not necessarily in the frame to consider such as transaction. Like Alibaba, Tencent might be viewed as too close to the Chinese government.

No-one

This is an option which is looking increasingly likely. Not only will the business cost a huge amount of money, perhaps a 30-40% premium on market capitalisation, the acquirer will also have to swallow all the debt built-up over the years. There will also have to be enough cash to fuel the content ambitions of Netflix, it reportedly spend $7.5 billion on content last year.

Finally, the acquirer would also have to convince Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, as well as the shareholders, that selling up is the best option.

“If I was a shareholder or Reed Hastings, I’d be wondering whether it is better to be owned by someone else or just carry on what we’re doing now,” said Ed Barton, Practise Lead at Ovum.

“These guys are going down in business school history for what they have done with Netflix already, do they need to sell out to someone else?”

Netflix is growing very quickly and now bringing in some notable profits. The most interesting thing about this business is the potential as well. The US market might be highly saturated, but the international potential is massive. Many countries around the world, most notably in Asia, are just beginning to experience the Netflix euphoria meaning the growth ceiling is still years away.

What this international potential offers Netflix is time, time to explore new opportunities, convergence and diversification. Any business with a single revenue stream, Netflix is solely reliant on subscriptions, sits in a precarious position, but with international growth filling the coffers the team have time to organically create new business streams.

Ultimately, Hastings and his management team have to ask themselves a simple question; is it better to control our own fate or answer to someone else for a bumper payday? We suspect Hastings’ bank account is already bursting and this is a man who is driven by ambition, the need to be the biggest and best, breaking boundaries and creating the unthinkable.

Most of these suitors will probably be thinking they should have acquired Netflix years ago, when the price was a bit more palatable, but would they have been able to drive the same success as Hastings has done flying solo? We suspect not.