Category Archives: Phones

MoviePass – What it means and why AMC doesn’t like it

MoviePass has been around since 2011. It is a service that allows you to see as many movies as you want a month for a set price. There are some limitations like it will only cover the cost of 2D movie tickets. But the real story is that… It just dropped its price to $9.99 a month.

This means that a person can pay $10 a month and go see two, three, six, ten, movies in a month and not pay a dime more.

It is being hailed as the Netflix for the theater goer.

So, how can they do this? Why is AMC upset? How does it work? Let’s dive in.

How MoviePass works

  1. You sign up via the app for in the Apple App Store or in Google Play.
  2. You get a debit card in the mail.
  3. You go to the theater location where you want to buy the ticket.
  4. It verifies the location and pulls up the current showtimes, you choose your showtime.
  5. The app adds the cost of the ticket to your debit card account.
  6. You buy the ticket with your debit card.

Repeat steps 3-6 for subsequent movies.

MoviePass Business Model

MoviePass is taking a potentially huge loss on this gamble as they are still paying full price for the ticket. AMC and other theaters are not losing any money, MoviePass is the one taking the hit.

The average AMC ticket price is currently $9.30 a ticket. If a MoviePass subscriber sees just two movies a month MoviePass is at a loss. So… why?

Data.

MoviePass is owned by a data analysis company. Right now there is no way for the industry to know detailed specifics about who is going to movies. With this app they can know age, race, sex, location, group vs solo, time of day, time of year, etc. etc. etc. Information not available previously. They can then sell this data back to the studio and cover their costs and the studios can use this to know when to release certain movies, genres, and where, and at what time, to make the most money possible and not spend money where it won’t be beneficial.

What Doesn’t AMC Like This?

There are three reasons AMC does not like this, and at this point they are all speculation, but fairly valid reasoning on AMC’s part:

  1. It is an unsustainable business model that sets a false precedent and, when it fails, will hurt the theaters.
    • AMC believes that MoviePass will go bankrupt within a year. When this happens moviegoers who were used to paying the low price will go to AMC and others and wonder why they can’t match MoviePass’s model. Customers will become angry at AMC and other theaters, thus, hurting the industry.
  2. The Data collected and sold will lead to decreased theater releases.
    • AMC and others are losing money year after year. Less and less people are watching movies in theaters. This summers box office was the worst summer box office in a decade. If MoviePass gets this data into the hands of the studios and they find that, for example, releasing a horror film for a limited run in the mid-west and an extended run on the East Coast is more profitable, or that this movie would actually make more money going straight to VOD and skipping the theater altogether… The control is out of AMC’s hands.
  3. MoviePass could demand a cut of theater profits down the road.
    • If MoviePass does what is thinks it can do, which is significantly increase the traffic to theaters by offering such a good price, AMC’s profit forecast could change for the better as attendance goes up. What stops MoviePass from then going to AMC and saying something along the lines of, “If you want to continue to be a part of the MoviePass program and have our customers attend your theaters you need to give us a cut of your profits.” AMC couldn’t say no. Thus, AMC becomes the one paying for your discounted ticket via paying MoviePass and ends up sustaining the very model that ultimately cuts into their own profit margins.

What has History Shown Us?

Napster changed the face of the music industry to where it is still struggling today. Netflix changed the face of movie rentals that wiped Blockbuster from the map and made streaming the norm. MoviePass could drastically change how the movie industry functions in the future.

Does that mean we shouldn’t do it? That choice is yours. $10 a month for all-you-can-eat movies is a great deal and it is a company that has been in operation since 2011. And heck, with all the streaming services, theater prices, cable, etc. etc. Something has to give. We consumer need a break now and then, and this is a good break.

Conclusion

Ultimately, this is going to be interesting to watch as it unfolds. Blockbuster had the opportunity to buy Netflix back in the day and passed. AMC actually had a close partnership with MoviePass a few years ago and passed. Could AMC be the blockbuster of our time? Is MoviePass the way of the future or will the industry adapt?

I, for one, will be watching intently, popcorn in hand.

What do you think of moviepass? Are you going to try it out? Why or why not?

Allo just got a Desktop Interface – Goodbye Hangouts, Voxer, and GroupMe

Want to jump straight to the Allo desktop interface? Click here: https://allo.google.com/web

Currently, I use several apps to communicate with family, friends, business partners, leadership teams, etc.:

  • Hangouts for SMS and Hangout IM’s (I am a Project Fi user so SMS still works in Hangouts… for now)
  • Voxer for voice messages
  • GroupMe for group text messages
  • Allo for communication with my wife and a handful of others
  • Facebook Messenger for those that don’t have my phone or email
  • Inbox by Gmail for personal email (Gmail app for business email)

In this convoluted time of hundreds of messenger and SMS apps I am hoping to rid myself of at least 3 –  Voxer, Hangouts, and GroupMe – once Allo has a desktop interface.

If you read my last post then you know about the crazy messaging world we live in today. If I haven’t said it before, I will say it again, I am a Google fan, and once Google gets something right it will be hard for me to stay away.

Google Allo and Duo are approaching their one-year mark, and a lot has changed for both over the last year. But the one thing that will make me fully dump three other apps for Allo just dropped.

You can find my launch-day reviews of each app here and here, respectively. But over the last year we have seen many features and upgrades added to these two apps that make them both stand out in their fields. While this won’t be a full feature list of Allo, I do want to touch on why I think Allo can replace these three apps (and apps like them) and give a breakdown of some bonus features Allo can do that these other apps cannot:

Text anyone in a group just like GroupMe

Allo has the ability to do group conversations. These conversations can be done whether or not everyone in the group wants to download and use the app. They will get an initial notification from Allo that [contact] has sent them a message via Allo and will offer a link to download, but, should they decline, they can continue to text back and forth with the person or group. (SMS cannot handle images, emoji’s, stickers, Google Assistant Cards,  and other content so keep this in mind, they will be sent another link to download Allo when this content is shared by the Allo user).

Voice recordings practically live like Voxer

While Voxer has the almost instant walkie-talkie-like feeling, Allo has a feature very close to this, and, if you aren’t using Voxer for instant conversation but instead find yourself using it to relay audio because it is easier, Allo gets the job done. In any group or individual conversation you can hold the microphone button and record your message. As soon as you let go it sends it off, notifying the user. My wife and I will switch back and forth between texts over Allo to sending recordings depending on whether we are driving or dealing with kids.

You can still send SMS texts to your friends and family that don’t use Allo, sort of

Just like other apps like GroupMe, Allo will not send you a native SMS, but will tell you that your friend is using Allo, offer a link to download the app, and then proceed via SMS throughout the rest of the conversation. It won’t use your friends’ native phone number (just like GroupMe doesn’t) so that can be frustrating, but it doesn’t mean that you can’t have a chat with your non-Allo friends. (Granted, if they want to see anything beyond your 160 characters they will have to download the app.)

What else does Allo bring to the table?

Features Allo has that the other apps do not:

  1. The Google Assistant baked into every conversation to help you find the information you need and instantly share it with your friends. A collaborative tool to find movies, restaurants, play games, etc.
  2. Incognito mode with encrypted, self-timed expiring conversations for your secure messages (Hey wife, remind me of your SSN? What is the security code on our credit card? etc.)
  3. Smart Replies (like you see in the Gmail app and other Google apps)
  4. Make Duo calls with a button for Duo in every conversation
  5. Enlarge or shrink your text or emo
  6. Drawing over images you have taken to point out areas of interest (or just have fun).
  7. A future with Google money and Google innovation. (Voxer is independently owned, GroupMe is owned my Microsoft, and Hangouts is dead according to Google)

So why haven’t I made the jump until now? Desktop.

About 90% of my messaging conversations happen cross-platform. While I am on a computer I am using hangouts.google.com and group.me for my SMS and IM needs along with Facebook Messenger (and I am on a computer close to 10 hours a day, on average). The rest of the time I am continuing those conversations on my phone, switching to the audio platforms when driving or unable to text quickly.

With Allo this can all be in one app, and that is a big deal for me.

Now, like everything, this is not for everyone, but for those that want a straightforward way to do almost everything they can with 3 or more other apps… Well… Allo is the place for me.

What do you think about Allo having a desktop counterpart? Do you use other desktop apps like Group.me, Hangouts, Whatsapp or others? Why or why not? Let me know in comments below or hit me up on Facebook!

 

 

SMS, MMS, RCS and Modern Messaging Apps

The majority of this post was written while I was composing the next post about Allo and their desktop client. The conversation is directly related as you will see when that post comes out, but, ultimately, this topic warrants it’s own post.

SMS and MMS (Short Message Service and MultiMedia Service): A brief history

SMS was built to send a 160 character message from one cell phone number to another. That is all it was ever built to do and that protocol has not changed. It is a system that is finally widespread enough to be available everywhere in the world and yet the structure of how each cell service and cell carrier interpret is still not standardized. MMS was created to allow for some simple expansion beyond the limits of SMS and often MMS is used in its place to get the users request carried out correctly.

Some examples:

  • SMS was built for GSM networks and so has never had a perfect marriage with CDMA networks, AKA Sprint and Verizon, and only at the creation of 3g were they able to jump on board (3G and onward uses code akin to a US tourist using an adapter to plug-in to a European outlet, it gets the job done but isn’t ideal or perfect).
  • Messages that are longer than 160 characters (thus not supported by SMS) are handled differently by different carriers. Some carriers will send longer SMS in 160 character broken spurts to keep it within the SMS protocol, others will convert the message to MMS so it can be sent all at once.
  • Group texts either come in separately as each text is received (keeping it in the SMS protocol) or are also converted to MMS so that they can stay together.
  • SMS and MMS both have to be deeply integrated into every developed text app on any given phone so that things continue to go smoothly. This is determined by each carrier and phone manufacturer and there is no universal standard. Things like emoji beyond just semicolon, dash, end-parentheses (AKA ; – ) = 😉 ), photos, voicemail, active links that you can click, location services, videos, etc. and the list can go on and on and each carrier and phone manufacturer has to build an app that can translate both SMS and MMS natively.

SMS, at its core, is great, but we WANT it to do more than it was built to do.

RCS (Rich Communications Services) – the future(?) of SMS/MMS

This is a very new (read: Nov 2016) protocol that has been created by the GSMA, a global consortium of mobile network providers, and is currently being pioneered by Google and their “Android Messages” app. It allows for a multitude of protocols beyond SMS and MMS including gifs, location-based services and many others, and it is the desire by most carriers and by Google for this to become the new standard, at least across Android devices. It is a collaboration between network providers and phone manufacturers as the phone has to be built with the right software, and the carrier has to support the RCS signal. RCS is not yet being developed for the iPhone as Apple wants you to keep using iMessage and has no reason to integrate RCA into iMessage at this time.

Honestly, Android Authority has done a phenomenal job of breaking down RCS and the potential future of this new messaging protocol in their overview here and, if you are interested, I really recommend checking out that article.

Independent Messaging Services (Facebook, Allo, Hangouts, iMessage, WhatsApp, GroupMe, Voxer, etc.)

So, many messaging services do not use SMS, MMS, and RCS natively (from here on all three protocols will be lumped under the term “SMS” in this post). Since the consumer wants so much more, companies are trying hard to give them more and, if we are honest, they want you to find what you want in their app over their competitors. So companies will continue to be divisive on SMS. They desperately want to leave it behind because of its limitations and programming requirements, but know the importance of its widespread use at the same time. So, each company has to make a call, place a bet, and see how it plays out: To support or not to support, that is the question. So what does that mean?

  • Supporting SMS allows for their app users to more easily talk to non-app users and vice-versa, thus creating a space where people that want to use the app and enjoy the features can, but those that don’t want to download the app don’t ever have to.
  • Not supporting SMS allows the app developers more freedom to develop new feature as they don’t have to constantly adapt for the third-party protocols, and it forces users to download their app if they want to talk to those already using it.

So, it is a gamble.

The Gamble of Google Hangouts, vs the Gamble of Facebook Messenger

Google Hangouts

Google Hangouts came with SMS integration built in almost right from the start (Hangouts launched in May 2013 and got SMS integration in September with the launch of Android 4.4 Kitkat.) Google gambled that, by making Hangouts the default messaging app on their Nexus devices, people would use hangouts as their SMS app and, thus, begin using the non-SMS portions of the app as well (group video chat being a major one) and create native Hangout conversations, and, by extension, start telling their friends and family to go get the app. Unfortunately, this did not happen. Most people just used the app to send SMS messages and never used the extra functionalities that Hangouts offered, and, since people didn’t need to download the app to text those who had it, they weren’t motivated to do so. Google Fans and Nexus owners used it, and possibly their close friends and family, and that was about it. Hangouts was not heavily downloaded on non-Google devices like the iPhone. 3rd-party Android phone developers (Samsung, LG, Huawei, Sony, HTC, etc.) were pushing their own SMS apps and not Hangouts.

The adoption did not go the way Google had hoped. (Thus, Allo does not have SMS integration, at least for the time being. They are gambling the other direction this time around.)

Facebook Messenger

Facebook Messenger, born in 2008, added SMS integration in 2012, but pulled it shortly after when it didn’t gain much traction. Then, last year in 2016, they again integrated SMS, after showing that they had triple the daily amount of messages sent across their two messaging apps (Messenger and WhatsApp) than sent daily over SMS. Why did they do this?

Facebook pulled out of SMS initially hoping more people would come to Facebook Messenger to talk to their friends who were already on Facebook. It was a gamble that worked. People downloaded the app to talk to people on the service they provided. Then, once they were established, they integrated SMS to try and reach the outliers (and to anyone who had downloaded the Messenger app in the last year, you know how pushy they are to be your default SMS app). They took the same gamble Google took for Hangouts: To try and reach a wider audience and get more people to download and use their app (If I can do SMS and my Facebook messages all in one app, why do I need another?) It worked for Facebook, it did not for Google.

The Ultimate Goal of a Messaging App: Downloads and Active Users

To get you to use their app: This is why Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp and others allow for SMS, this is why Allo, Voxer, GroupMe and others do not. It is the ultimate goal of every company, and it is the gamble they take when they decide to integrate or not.

So, whether or not you want to stick with the new RCS protocol provided by the carriers that support the Android Messages app, or jump on board a dedicated messaging app created by Facebook, Google, Snapchat, Instagram, or any of the hundreds of other companies out there, the future is not yet set for our mobile communications and probably won’t be for the foreseeable future.

What the Pixel Phone launch Means for Google and Us

Tuesday, 10/4/16, Google announced some new hardware that, well, frankly, I want. But there are some very important things to notice about the phone they announced and how it impacts Google, and us.

If you want to see all the products they launched check it all out at madeby.google.com I, personally, am pretty excited for many of them.

Introducing: Pixel

The new Google phone is called the Pixel. This is the first time that Google has not released a new Nexus phone in years (six years, to be specific) and it is intentional. They are changing the way they produce and market these phones and I see it as a positive step for Google in the phone marketplace, but not necessarily one for us, the end users.

The Pixel is the first phone 100% built by Google

All their previous phones were built by third party manufacturers. LG, Huawei, Samsung, HTC, Asus, and Motorola all have built a Nexus phone or tablet and even though Google had a heavy hand on the design and specs of these devices, they did not have control over everything, especially in the beginning. And as the Nexus line has grown Google has grown in their understanding as well.

A Brief History of Android

When Google first purchased the Android operating system they wanted to build phone software that was open source. Anyone could use it and tweak it to their liking. This is why so many Android phones look and function so differently and why you can find hundreds of modified OS’s created by coders online that you can download and install on your phone if you know how. Each manufacturer can also tweak Android to their liking so the software works better for their hardware. They also have created their own ecosystems (looking at you, Samsung) that tie a person to Samsung but not necessarily to Google. This way we will go back to Samsung time and time again for our phones instead of being comfortable with any Android phone. Granted, they are a company and they want to keep their customers, so, I get it, I do.

This has positive and negative effects for Google and the Android team. We hear constantly about the fragmentation of Android (updates available for some phones but not others) because of how much these third-parties have tweaked Android. When an update is released by Google third parties have to tweak it to match their other tweaks. This can take months to do and, let’s face it, they have newer phones to worry about. It also pushes the Android team to better their own product as they see third parties adding functionality that was not available in the pure Android software.

Android’s Future

Google has been fighting for years to maintain control over Android and create a streamlined operating system to battle fragmentation and their competitors Operating Systems but, for obvious reasons, manufacturers are against this. They want their personal tweaks to stay to benefit their company. As Android is open source anyone can use it for any device and only has to pay Google when they want that device to have access to the Google Play Store. Samsung has been wanting to move away from Android for a long time for this reason and if Samsung left Android… Google would take a hard hit. Can you name the latest phone from HTC? What about LG, Sony? Motorola? Asus? But I bet you can name the latest phone from Samsung.

So, Google had to do something to save Android’s future.

The new Pixel phone is the first phone that Google built the hardware and software all in-house. There is only one other company in the world that does this that anyone has ever heard of. Apple.

Even the look of the Pixel phone is meant to be a challenge to the look of the iPhone. This is very good news for Google and for us, as it means these phones will always work the best when it comes to running Android and Google apps and now Customer Service directly from Google is actually built directly into the phones.

There is something else these phones are copying from Apple, however, that does not bode well for Nexus owners – price.

This is NOT a Nexus

The Pixel phone starts at $649. There are two variants, a smaller and a larger, but this time around phone size is the only difference. They are built with the exact same hardware in every other regard. The price climbs when you go with the larger screen, or the larger storage capacity, etc. You can see all the price options on Google’s product page.

So, if you want Google’s iPhone, as I do, I have no doubt you will get a great phone. They have put years of time and energy coming to this point to offer a true iPhone competitor that can save Android and, if anyone can compete with a new phone model on the front line, Google can. But those of us that have been used to solid phones at a great price that would receive the latest versions and security updates, those days are gone.

What do you think about Google’s move to provide a phone that can directly compete with the iPhone as well as Samsung?

Featured image from Google’s Blog on the new Pixel