Is there life in Google TV or is it time to change the channel?
Tom Dougherty, CEO – Stealing Share
25 January 2011
With so many choices, where does Google TV fit in?
It has been a few months since Google TV made its market debut and it looks as though, by the time it gains some footing, it might only be enough to help it on its way out the door.
Google TV, an interface that runs on set-top hardware made by Sony and Logitech, allows users to search the Internet for TV shows, movies, as well as host services like Pandora and VUDU. The idea is an intriguing one, but it’s not a real game changer for a market saturated with similar enough alternatives.
“Like most of the rebranding garbage out there, Belk ended up with a new logo and color palette and not much more (smells like politics to me).”
In the past year, set-top boxes have taken off. Many connect to similar services listed above, provide similar connectivity, and are simple to use. This steep competition – and the fact that no real stand out exists – has created an immense amount of noise in the market place.
There is the Apple TV, video game consoles, Roku players, the Boxee Box, the VUDU Set-Top box, WD TV Live, TiVo, Blu-ray players, and internet connective TVs that all allow users to connect to similar services (although a bit watered down from that of Google TV’s) and view movies and TV shows without needing cable service. Of these options, Google TV is the most expensive.
It is a market flooded with competition with no competitor staking any real claim by way of meaningful brand messaging. The option with the closest semblance to a brand identity would be the Apple TV, whose parent brand has allowed for preference by sheer association.
One large issue for Google TV with overcoming Google’s own consumer granted permissions. Google is known for their “free” search engine. From the perspective of the consumer, Google does not have permission to sell a good or service at a price. Because, well, up to this point, Google has been free for users.
In addition, Google has done little to present to consumers why they should grant any permission adjustments. The Android operating system, which was acquired by Google in 2005, has been successful but it does not lead with the Google brand. In fact, when referencing devices that use Android, most users say they have a “such-and-such” phone with Android (clearly defining identification between the parent brand and sub-brand). In the case of Google TV, the Google brand leads so a perception shift of the consumer needs to be pulled off.
It’s not impossible to pull that off, but it means Google must have the right brand messaging. (It might, for example, have presented a new product name not so directly identified with the parent brand.) Google is lucky in the sense that it has a strong brand identity. The difficulty is determining how much slack the consumer will give Google before they tighten the leash and require Google to restructure positioning to increase consumer acceptance in ventures that go beyond the search engine.
Infinity advertising is criminal Tom Dougherty, CEO - Stealing Share 19 October 2017 Infinity advertising fails on many levels The latest Infinity advertising leaves me cold. Strike that. It makes me heated. Not that I have anything against Infinity as a brand. It...
Coach becomes Tapestry Tom Dougherty, CEO - Stealing Share 18 October 2017 Who cares Coach is becoming Tapestry? Coach changing its name to Tapestry means nothing no matter what CEO Victor Luis says. He tells The New York Times that the iconic leather bag company is...
Curb Your Enthusiasm Tom Dougherty, CEO - Stealing Share 17 October 2017 Curb Your Enthusiasm is better than season nine Few television shows claim the mantle of genius. Oddly enough, those that I deem worthy of that distinction have all come from HBO. My elite list...