In a previous post, Microsoft in the Information Security Market, I commented on Microsoft's most recent move into the information security market, and the anti-virus market segment. Moreover, several months earlier I pointed out 5 things Microsoft can do to secure the Internet and why it wouldn't, namely,- Think twice before reinventing the security industry
- Become accountable, first, in front of itself, than, in front of the its stakeholders
- Reach the proactive level, and avoid the reactive, in respect to software vulnerabilities
- Introduce an internal security oriented culture, or better utilize its workforce in respect to security
- Rethink its position in the security vulnerabilities market
Recently, the much hyped debate on whether Microsoft's Anti Virus would take a piece of the anti virus market seem to have finally materialized with the help of basic pricing strategies :
"Helped by low pricing, Microsoft's Windows Live OneCare landed the number two spot in sales at US stores in its debut month, according to The NPD Group. The antivirus and PC care package nabbed 15.4 per cent of security suite sales at retailers such as Best Buy and Amazon.com, according to NPD's data. The average price was $29.67, well below Microsoft's list price of $49.95. Online at Amazon.com, OneCare is available for only $19.99."
Ya-hoo? Not so fast since stats like these exclude the hundreds of licensing deals, co-branding, ISPs affiliation and resellership positions, as well as shipped-ready PCs with software from the rest of the vendors :
"Symantec noted that NPD covers retail sales only, and does not include consumer sales through internet service providers and PC makers, for example. "We just had a record June quarter in consumer sales, said Mike Plante, a marketing director at the company. You can't really draw market share conclusions from the NPD data alone, particularly with just a month of data."
I wonder what would Microsoft's strategy consist of by the time their offering reaches the growth stage, and starts maturing, perhaps bargaining by offering software discounts and one-stop-shop services. I've once pointed out on another anti virus market statistics concern, namely Panda Software's -- private company, no SEC or stockholders to bother about -- stated earnings right next to the rest of publicly traded companies. My point is that, if Gartner were to offer a better grasp of this vibrant market segment, they'd better have used F-Secure which is a publicly traded anti virus vendor, as it would greatly improve an analysts confidence in the provided data, wouldn't it?
Penetration pricing is all about gaining market share, and Microsoft's case reminds of how RealNetworks were ready to lose cents on each and every song sold through their digital music service, but to offer, at least temporary, a competitive alternative to iTunes.
Security cannot be bought, a false sense of security can though. Whereas risk exposure and risk mitigation define a scientific approach going beyond a visionary security management, it's arguable which one dominates, as marketing and branding often do the job -- if (true) advertising does its job, millions of people keep theirs. Case in point, Symantec which currently has the largest market share -- greatly depends on the geographical area and number of anti virus products included -- is indeed the market leader, but it doesn't necessarily mean it offers the "leading" product. Exactly the opposite, the most popular, available, one that usually comes with Norton's powerful and well known brand offering.
Why wouldn't Microsoft want to license Kaspersky's, F-Secure's or Symantec's technology for instance? Because that would have been like a Chinese growth syndrome so to speak. The Chinese economy is shifting from a source of raw materials, to an actual manufacturer, a little bit of vertical integration given you have something to offer to the market at a particular moment in time and start counting the new millionaires. The higher proportion of the business machine you own, the greater the profits at the end of quarter, and with the key regions across the world still getting online, malware is only going to get more attention from both sides of the front.
From a business point of view, you can twist a user's actual wants so successfully you can make it almost impossible to remember what was needed at the first place -- long live the sales forces! It is often arguable whether anti virus software has turned into a commodity the way media players did, but for the end user -- the one with the powerful bandwidth available -- price and availability speak for themselves. Controversial to some recent comments on why the most popular anti virus products don't work, mostly because malware authors are testing their "releases" on these products, they actually do it on all anti virus products the way pretty much everyone aware is testing suspicious files, or evaluating vendors' response times.
Don't get surprised if next time you buy a cheeseburger, the dude starts explaining the basics of zero day protection, and offer you a ZIP-based discount if any on an anti virus solution -- with up to three licenses for your wired family. Co-branding, licensing and industry outsiders are on the look for fresh revenues, and with malware representing the most popular threat as well as security "solution" bought, stay tuned a McDonald's Anti Virus "on-the-go". Hopefully one using a licensed technology from a vendor with experience and vision.
Related posts:
Look who's gonna cash for evaluating the maliciousness of the Web
Spotting valuable investments in the information security market
Valuing Security and Prioritizing Your Expenditures
Budget Allocation Myopia and Prioritizing Your Expenditures
No comments:
Post a Comment