Agora Media Group Innovation Blog

Last year Lonely Planet launched the Augmented Reality application called Lonely Planet Compass Guides.
Last Sunday -one day after the launch of the iPad- Lonely Planet has released an iPad application named Lonely Planet’s 1000 Ultimate Experiences.

Two quotes by the the CEO Matt Goldberg (taken from Travolution):

“The iPad is a ground breaking device that gives us the flexibility to publish content in extraordinary ways we would never have thought possible a year ago,” said Matt Goldberg, Lonely Planet chief executive.

“We are delighted to offer an exciting new product for the launch of iPad and are experimenting restlessly with new technologies and platforms as we build on our strategy to become the world’s leading travel media and services provider.”

The application is inspired on their book with the same name, giving the user a digital experience of the top 1000 places.

(taken from Tnooz)

Once again, it’s interesting to see the innovation within the travel industry and how it’s applied in new business opportunities. The same article by Travolution mentions that the InterContinental Hotels Group is going to equip their concierge teams with iPads. The iPad is a great device in showing visuals to their guests in a new, innovative and portable way.

On Lonely Planet’s corporate level, it’s a decision which fits into their long-term goal. The diffusion of their information, and the easy usage and access will benefit retention amongst their target groups. When iPads become available with non-WiFi Internet connection, the application can be enhanced with User Generated Content on the spot.

If you have an iPad and a traveler, would you buy this application or not? If not, why?

The first Android based television is presented by People of Lava from Sweden and  it’s an Internet-connected TV from a country that will launch its first television device in decades.

The two questions that need to be asked and answered, correctly pointed out by Wired also, are the following two:

* What is the point of some of the services that are being offered through the Android TV.
* Web-TV is the future, but simply replacing a screen (laptop for TV) is not the way to go.

With regard to the first question, I think it’s a matter of comfort, new/enhanced experiences made possible by the TV screen instead of the laptop screen.
Video calling with Skype on your TV is the same kind of starting point in finding a solution for a need.

The real challenge is the control part. For services on the Android TV, a keyboard is needed, the perceived risks or transition risks can be too high for many, willing to make the trade off between a better/new experience (Web TV) and a known device/process (Laptop). Why choose for a TV+Keyboard when there is the much used laptop?

This challenge relates to the second question, a replacement of screen is not the the long-term sustainable solution, from the user point of view it adds only a new device for the same needs, which could complicate usage or offer too much choice.

Researches have pointed out to the fact of multitasking during the (passive) TV experience. The new TV experience is dynamic, reciprocal and certainly not passive, but combining the laptop and TV in media consumption without the burdens/difficulties of usage, can be a relevant middle-way to change TV behavior without being too disruptive.

From an application point of view, the Android TV will be interesting if the portfolio of applications is broad. Will this be a chicken-egg scenario?

People of Lava can tap in two applications sources, their own and of course the Open Source Android platform. Their own app store can be relatively extensive, but real power of such a device -and future Android TV devices- will be reflected by the community efforts/applications.

Below you’ll find specifications and a couple of images which can be found on the People of Lava website:
read more

Since last Saturday, plenty of media coverage is given to the release of the iPad.
I’ve read many articles on the applications for the iPad and on a more strategic marketing level, the impact of the iPad on the media devices, ubiquity and wireless industry.

Surprisingly, the CEO of Traffic4u showed his newly acquired iPad this morning, giving me a short but clear look at the device.
There’s a big difference in reading about a device and actually experiencing the device. This counts as well for the iPad.
At first sight it’s a wonderful device in lign with the Apple designs we all know.

The dimensions of the iPad were known to me, but I could not get a feeling if it’s useful, too big or not handy.
Having seen it, I must admit the dimensions are just fine. Not too big, but also not too small which possibly would give a kind of “smartphone” feeling.
Navigating through the iPad is just as with the iPhone, intuitive and nothing new with regard to this aspect.
What I did find suprising is the usage, presentations can easily be given via the iPad. Reading pages, not a problem.
Having a look at pictures, good screen quality and size. Games, awesome size screen to have a good gaming experience.

All in all, the first look at the iPad was very positive and eager to learn where the iPad, ancillary revenues, industry, media consumption and adoption will head to.

If you had the chance to see the iPad, what are your very first impressions?

I think it’s quite interesting how much of this the filmmakers actually got right. Let’s bear in mind, this is a 40 year old video, made when the Internet was in the cradle – used only by the military.

They predicted online banking, flat screens, eCommerce, and even excel for keeping track of finances on the home computer. This is a great video for innovators to show detractors when they try to bury far-fetched technology.

Having lived in 1969…albeit only two at the time… let me tell you how it was in the early 70′s when I was a kid. People mailed letters – they walked to the post office and stamps cost 12 cents – there were actual phone booths on the streets where you could call anyone in the city for ten cents for as long as you wanted. There were records, actual vinyl – that were sold in various speeds and sized from 33/45 and even 78 rpm. My first gadget was in 1980 – it was an Atari Pong that ran on our black and white tube TV that had four channels. My dad’s hair was longer than my mom’s.

In case you are wondering if this is, yet another, Youtube fake – it’s not. It’s not fake at all. It’s a documentary by the Philco-Ford corporation from 1967, titled “1999 A.D.” The man is Wink Martindale, who went on to become a game show host.

I did chuckle at the idea that they thought our electronics would get bigger, but they actually got smaller – and the scene with the wife choosing and husband begrudgingly paying is more 50′s than 60′s… when the mantra was “The man will pay…The woman will look after the kids”

And who needs a mouse when you can have all those knobs, lights and buttons everywhere! Maybe in 20 years, the current keyboard and mouse setup could be looked on with similar amusement…. Even using an iPhone, I wish my laptop screen worked that way sometimes.

But at the end of the day, they were pretty accurate. The most interesting part for me was the crude input devices (e.g. ‘writing’ an email or turning a dial or pushing a button to shop online).

This is crazy…it would never work! The internet? Who would want to sit in front of a machine and type into a little box or watch videos on a screen?

Oh, wait….never mind!

The Jetson’s was also made in the 1960′s – I remember watching the reruns as a kid in the 70′s. It was also quite interesting with its flying cars & skype-like screen phones where you could see the person in real time while on the phone

Various media and websites already referred to the rumor of a mobile ad platform, called iAd.
MediaPost announces that Apple is preparing a personalized mobile advertising system which could well be “the next big thing”.

Interesting are the release dates of both the iPad and iAd.
April 3rd is the official launch of the iPad, only for days later is the supposed launch of iAd.
This could well mean that there are -any kind of- ties between iAd, iPad and the iPhone.

A mobile advertising platform means serving location based ads, adding contextual relevancy to the ads, creating a second generation of proximity marketing.
In the same article by MediaPost, it points out that Google has won patents on technologies that serve dynamically ads based upon one’s location.

All that can be concluded from this is that the battle between Apple and Google is by far not over. It makes it only more interesting, competitiveness raises and accelerates innovation and developments which only benefits the users.

Let’s wait and see what happens next week. A counter-attack on Google’s AdMob acquisition and development is bound to come, a possible launch in close relation to the iPad makes it more impacting.

What do you think of a possible mobile ad platform by Apple?

Within a few months it will be possible to get Skype on your TV.
The TV manufacturing partners of Skype,  LG and Panasonic have embedded Skype in their internet-connected HDTVs.

This is a new and great way to communicate with your family and friends, away from the computer. A large screen further intensifies the experience.
The relax factor is an advantage as well for the users (and a USP for Skype TV), video calling on a big screen on a couch does certainly make it a more fun call-experience.

Follow @skypeonyourtv on Twitter if you want to receive updates.

What do you think of this move by Skype, bringing videocalling to the TV?

Wow! That came out of left field -  unsuspected but… really – something that really makes sense when we consider TV Everywhere as a concept (at least for me!). If the iPad does get the traction that many are predicting (Apple Inc.’s iPad tablet computer hits US shelves on Saturday, April 3, 2010), and they do flog 10-20 million in 2010, the converging media landscape will really have a new player in terms of co-viewed TV and Social TV.

Personally, I have always had issues with watching video on mobile devices – not that I am blind, I can actually see well. But I just don’t enjoy the experience. Interactive TV on an iPad (24.3 cm × 19.0 cm × 1.3 cm) will certainly be more enjoyable and feasible for most consumers.

Will this be a one screen or two screen play? Or both?

“Part of the idea is that mobile devices are easier and more appealing to play with while watching TV than laptop or desktop computers — but the tablet will hit the sweet spot in between.” reports Ad Age, so let’s wait and see.

MTV Developing ‘Co-Viewing’ Apps for the iPad

Magazines and newspapers aren’t the only media eying big benefits upon the iPad’s arrival: TV is poised to use the device in new ways, including creating interactive, social apps designed to be used while watching live programming.

MTV Networks, for example, is developing a “co-browsing app meant to be used while watching live TV,” said one executive familiar with MTV’s iPad plans. “This means the iPad could be the appendage that makes interactive TV a reality.”

Kristin Frank, general manager of MTV and VH1 Digital, said MTV is focusing on two approaches to its apps, whether for mobile or the iPad: co-viewing apps that capture the social-media chatter around TV and awards shows and apps for video on the go. IPad apps for “Beavis and Butt-Head,” “MTV News” and “VH1 To Go” are all due in April, she said.

“Fifty-nine percent of people are multitasking when watching TV — that’s something we’ve always known,” said Ms. Frank, referring to recent Nielsen data quantifying a longstanding observation. “This is the next evolution.”

Mobile phone apps to run on the iPhone and Android devices remain MTV’s priority for 2010, Ms. Frank noted, but the iPad apps under construction are a reminder that TV is not about to sit the tablet out.

Read More…

* * * * * * * * * * *
The paper mentioned in this post is reviewed and provided with comment by Gianluigi Cuccureddu to benefit this position paper for Mobile AR revenue streams.
* * * * * * * * * * *

A while back I wrote the article Complementing on Augmented Reality Business Models as a further elaboration on the efforts by Gary Hayes on this subject.
A new position paper has been published by Christine Perey -an industry analyst- for the Mobile AR Summit @MWC 2010 on the opportunities of revenue streams within Mobile Augmented Reality.

You can read the paper Where’s the Money? Mobile AR Revenue Streams on PDF.
For new technologies it is important and vital to have business cases and concrete revenue streams in order to take the technology and its opportunities to a mainstream adoption. It’s also needed to get the technology to the next phase of the Hype Cycle.
The paper distinguishes four kinds of sources, namely the Corporations, Small Businesses, Public Services and the End Users. For all the four sources there are revenue streams that can be tapped into when the applications are developed.
Where corporations benefit more from customized AR applications, the focus on small businesses, public services and end users will be on location, time and content (in relation to context).
For the sources mentioned in the paper, revenue streams are elaborated. What do you think of the revenue streams of corporations and end users?

I do believe here is where the power of Mobile AR will be shown. A flux of ubiquitous information requests (content) made relevant by interests (person), time and location (context).
Making sure these information requests are dynamic and only shown and offered when the need is there, will advance the coping of daily information overloads. This might not seem relevant at this point of time, but the real-time Web is just the beginning, and augmented information based on real-time streams will further increase information consumption and decrease information understanding.

One of the first and foremost challenges, put forth in the paper, is the distribution of revenues. Who is paying who, who is earning what?
This is important to keep the ecosystem ‘up and running’ without losing individual links due to a inbalance in monetary redistribution.
User Generated Content will add challenges to it, like UGC websites are already experiencing right now.

How do you think the Mobile AR relationships look like from a revenue distribution point of view?
What other revenue streams do you know which are not yet pointed out in the paper?

Great graphic that presents very well the opportunities and the Content-Context relationship.

What interesting to see are the Synaptic Web derivatives when we have a look at the Context.
Information is being filtered and recommended, based upon interests, location, subscriptions and so on. By doing so, the offered Content is more relevant and appropriate.

When looking at the amount of possibilities that are shown in the image,  understanding the -potential- power of this device is important.
Why?
First of all to understand the business environment better, secondly to adjust business strategies to these new opportunities or maybe reinforcing current strategies in order to create a better positioning and proposition.

I should at least research the impact on middle- and long term, making sure you won’t be surprised and ready to thrive or survive this mobile transformation.

(click to enlarge)

What do you think of the graphic and that what is being shown?

Thought I would share my winning pitch for The Netherlands Deloitte’s Technology, Media & Telecommunications (TMT) Predictions 2010 Tech Visionary for futurist views on Social TV and Media Convergence.

I wrote it on the train on the way down… I actually forgot half of it and kind of made it all up again once I got up there. I had two minutes to pitch… in front of about 200 of Holland’s tech community who voted by SMS.

My name is Richard Kastelein, I am a Canadian of Dutch heritage and am currently working a Chief Strategy officer for a startup in Groningen called Worldticketshop as well as building a creative and innovation agency called Agora Media Group in London.

How many of you have young children out there?

In five years, your children and mine will laugh at the old days when certain programs were available only at certain times. We will too.

On demand TV  is just part of the great change we are going to see in the future… where media will be ubiquitous, and will no longer be the passive experience we now see today.

It’s called TV Everywhere.

I am going to go through four quick points.

1.       Production. The rise of User Generated Content has already and greatly shifted the Internet landscape and will do the same for TV. Merged media will be everywhere, video, audio, photography, 3D and more.

2.       Delivery – Entertainment will be available in the cloud – everywhere, on demand and available to anyone, anywhere.

3.       Consumption – This will be profoundly changed due to the future convergence of the Web and TV, where web widgets become part of the TV experience and viewing culture will be radically changed due to the inclusion of recommendation engines which will offer true reflection of consumer needs and wants.

4.        And lastly, Monetization. Last year, it was noted by MTV here that content companies are now driven by control of Intellectual Property. And that has too and will change. Business models will change. I call it tCommerce and it will also be a paradigm shift for the TV industry. Last year MTV also mentioned that new business models will need to come into place. We feel that affiliation models will rise – profit sharing rather than profit hoarding. The ability to shop on TV will be seamless and simple allowing for revenue sharing between the broadcasters and advertisers.

Already new players in the social tv space are building API’s and SDK’s to allow developers to make the shift from iPhone and Facebook to new models on TV. Yahoo Connected has an Open API, Europe ‘s HBBTV will likely be Open Source software as it’s based largely on Open IPTV and even BBC’s Canvas in the UK is pushing towards open standards.

I will wrap this up by saying that it’s my feeling that this could be the next ‘bubble’ in the market as TV is going be decentralized and it will, in the future, be owned by the audience in many ways. Unlike TV today…. Such as in the USA, where the networks are publically owned and contracting – with no sign of growth in the future.

Thanks for your time and feel free to contact me at the borrel if you are interested in chatting further. We are working on building products for this new space.