Showing posts sorted by relevance for query 10 percent inflection. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query 10 percent inflection. Sort by date Show all posts

Tuesday, May 1, 2018

5G Will Hit Inflection Point at 10% Adoption

For any successful consumer product, 10 percent adoption tends to the inflection point. That is the point at which adoption sharply accelerates. That has tended to be the pattern for mobile subscriptions as well.

So it would not be at all unusual to predict that 5G adoption, in any market, will hit an inflection point at about 10 percent adoption. That is basically what a forecast by GSMA Intelligence implies.


You can liken the 10-percent adoption to the shift from bleeding edge innovators to “early adopters,” which is about what 10-percent adoption represents. The key point is that adoption rates tend to accelerate after the 10-percent adoption point is reached.






Thursday, August 6, 2020

Advanced Technology Takes Longer Than You Think to Become Mainstream

Advanced technology often does not get adopted as rapidly as the hype would have you believe. In fact, most useful advanced technologies tend not to go mainstream until adoption reaches about 10 percent. That is where the inflection point tends to occur. That essentially represents adoption by innovators and early adopters. 

source: LikeFolio


One often sees charts that suggest popular and important technology innovations are adopted quite quickly. That is almost always an exaggeration. The issue is where to start the clock running: at the point of invention or at the point of commercial introduction? Starting from invention, adoption takes quite some time to reach 10 percent adoption, even if it later seems as though it happened faster. 

source: Researchgate


Consider mobile phone use. On a global basis, it took more than 20 years for usage to reach close to 10 percent of people. 

source: Quora


That is worth keeping in mind when thinking about, or trying to predict, advanced technology adoption. It usually takes longer than one believes for any important and useful innovation to reach 10-percent adoption


source: MIT Technology Review


That is why some might argue 5G will hit an inflection point when about 10 percent of customers in any market have adopted it.

Thursday, September 26, 2013

What Drives Mobile Revenue Growth After M2M or Internet of Things?

One common facet of new technology adoption is that change often comes with a specific pattern, namely a longish period of low adoption, followed by an inflection point leading to rapid adoption.

That leads supporters to overestimate early adoption and vastly underestimate later adoption. Mobile phone adoption, and smart phone adoption, illustrate the process. You might think adoption is a linear process. In fact, it tends to be non-linear.

In developing regions, mobile phone adoption hit an inflection point about 2003, for example. What will happen, relatively shortly, is market saturation. That's also part of the adoption process.

In developed markets, saturation of mobile phone usage has shifted growth to mobile data. Inevitably, growth will saturate even for data, and service providers will make a transition to yet another growth mode.

In large part, that explains high interest in machine to machine or Internet of Things investments by mobile service providers. It is possible that the next wave of revenue growth will have to come from mobile devices not directly used by people.

It also is possible the following wave, after M2M, will involve some sort of shift to third party or over the top apps.



Granted, adoption rates for digital technologies have accelerated. It took 39 years for fixed line telephone adoption to grow from 10 percent to 40 percent. Electricity required 15 years to grow from 10 percent to 40 percent penetration.

In the past, 10 percent adoption of any new technology is an important milestone, as it tends to represent the inflection point, when adoption of some new innovation accelerates. Observers of technology adoption might say that happens because people adopt new technologies when somebody they know has done so.

But it also often is the case that it takes time for people to learn how to use a technology. Some would say a disjuncture between spending on new technology and measurable productivity gains can happen because the value of important new technologies often requires a redesign of business processes, not the automation of older practices.

One might also argue that technology sometimes leads to a change in consumer behavior only when a reasonable substitute product is available, and people have learned how to use the product or process.

Adopting a new technology is similar to  any other kind of investment, economists might argue. As in the case of the investment decision, the adoption of new technology entails uncertainty over future profit streams, irreversibility that creates at least some sunk costs and the opportunity to delay.

In other words, people can make a rational decision to delay adoption until it is clear of the value, and value outweighs the costs of acquiring and using the new technology.

In some ways, that is characteristic of consumer use of online video delivery, and the substitution of online video for traditional subscription TV.

In many ways, we are in a pre-adoption phase, in part because content owners will not support full online delivery of all content currently available as part of a video subscription. But what is happening is that people are learning to use the Internet, their PCs, smart phones and other devices as familiar ways to get and view entertainment video.

Wednesday, November 16, 2022

Gigabit Services are Right on Schedule According to Edholm's Law and Nielsen's Law

U.S. home broadband customers buying gigabit tiers of service grew 35 percent year over year in the third quarter of 2022, according to Openvault. At the moment, more than 15 percent of U.S. home broadband accounts use gigabit connections. 


Also, more than half of home broadband accounts buy service in the 200 Mbps to 400 Mbps range. That group grew 100 percent year over year. 


A little more than a year ago about half of households were buying service in the 100 Mbps to 200 Mbps range, showing that Nielsen’s Law and Edholm’s Law of bandwidth supply continue to operate. 


source: Openvault 


Edholm’s Law states that internet access bandwidth at the top end increases at about the same rate as Moore’s Law suggests computing power will increase. Nielsen's Law essentially is the same as Edholm’s Law, predicting an increase in the headline speed of about 50 percent per year. 


Nielsen's Law, like Edholm’s Law, suggests a headline speed of 10 Gbps will be commercially available by about 2025, so the commercial offering of 2-Gbps and 5-Gbps is right on the path to 10 Gbps. 

source: NCTA  


Headline speeds in the 100-Gbps range should be commercial sometime around 2030. 


How fast will the headline speed be in most countries by 2050? Terabits per second is the logical conclusion. Though the average or typical consumer does not buy the “fastest possible” tier of service, the steady growth of headline tier speed since the time of dial-up access is quite linear. 


Gigabit tier subscribers hit an inflection point last year. The rule of thumb is that any successful and widely-bought consumer technology enters its mass adoption phase when about 10 percent of homes are users. For U.S. gigabit adoption, that happened in 2021. 


Some might attribute the Covid pandemic and work from home as driving the change, but adoption rates would have taken off in 2021 in any case, as predicted by the 10-percent-of-homes adoption theory. 


It also is easy to predict that 2 Gbps to 4 Gbps is the next evolution, as speeds at the top end continue to increase by 50 percent a year. Ny 2025 we should start seeing the first 10-Gbps services deployed at scale.


Monday, December 4, 2017

How Fast Will Linear Video Decline?

The conventional wisdom now is that over the top (online) video services are displacing linear video services. According to the latest forecast from The Diffusion Group, the conventional wisdom is correct.

Take rates (household penetration) of linear video services will decline from 85 percent of U.S. households in 2017 to 79 percent in 2030, according to TDG. But other TDG metrics suggest faster declines.

Some might argue the rate of change now modeled by most observers actually understates the degree of change. Up to this point, forecasters have (correctly) called for modest but steady declines in linear video take rates.

But some might note that market changes caused by new technology tend to follow a rather predictable “S” curve, where initial changes are quite modest, followed by fast changes when an inflection point is reached.

That means linear projections are proven wrong, as the rate of change actually becomes non-linear, usually after about 10 percent adoption of the new technology. That actually already has happened, in the U.S. market, in terms of adoption of OTT video services.

There are at least 187 million OTT video accounts in service, compared to roughly 93 percent household penetration of linear video.  So, counting by accounts, OTT video adoption is far beyond 10 percent, well over 100 percent adoption of households, as there are perhaps 126 million U.S. households.

As with mobile subscriber identity modules, some people might use more than one SIM. Some households have multiple subscriptions.


Up to this point, OTT has been a substitute for linear video, but not a complete substitute, as often happens early in the adoption cycle of new technology products. Over time, the new technology platform becomes more robust, eventually becoming a fully-fledged substitute for the legacy technology.

TDG predicts that, by 2030, roughly 30 million U.S. households--representing 26 percent of all U.S. households--will live without a linear service of any type.

So legacy video penetration will fall from 81 percent of U.S. households in 2017 to 60 percent in 2030, down 26 percent.

That estimate includes losses of traditional services to over the top services that stream “live content in real time,” as well as using the on-demand format favored by Netflix, Amazon Prime and others.

So, using that set of definitions, legacy linear video might drop substantially between now and 2030. That is just one reason why some find U.S. Department of Justice concerns about excessive potential market power if AT&T buys Time Warner to be somewhat odd.

The linear video market itself already is changing in ways that make "dominance" a problem that goes away as the market itself goes away. And even the new OTT market features average revenue per account perhaps seven to eight times cheaper than the linear product OTT replaces.

Sunday, December 30, 2018

Is It the "Year of X"?

It’s that time of year when some feel compelled to prognosticate on “what will happen next year,” while others remind us of what did happen “last year.” And there always are a brave few who will try to capture the essence in a single phrase: “the year of X,” whatever X is said to be.

At a high level, we might well look back at such highly-distilled “year of X” predictions and note that it almost never happens. “The year of X,” whatever X is said to be, nearly always occurs (in the sense of commercial adoption or inflection point of adoption) some future year.

My simple way of describing this situation is to say that “whatever is said to be the ‘year of X’ trend almost ensures it will not be.” Of course, some will argue that is not what they mean.

Instead, they tend to mean this is the year some trend is popularized or discovered. Okay, in that sense, there is firmer--yet still tenuous--ground to stand on. Rarely does a big new thing just burst on the scene, in terms of public awareness, in a decisively-new way,

What does happen is that some arbiter “proclaims” that this has happened. It’s arbitrary.

The point is that any truly-significant new technology, platform or commercial activity takes quite some time to reach commercialization, and typically quite long after all the hype has been crushed by disillusionment.


The point is that even highly-successful new technologies can take decades to reach commercial ubiquity, even if today’s software-driven products are adopted faster than innovations of the past.

It still can take a decade for widespread consumer use of any product or service to reach 50 percent to 60 percent adoption.


Also, recall that most new products, and most new companies fail: they simply never succeed as commercial realities. Also, we sometimes overestimate the actual time any innovation takes to reach 10 percent or some other level of adoption on a mass level.

There is debate about how fast smartphones were adopted for example. Was it seven years or something greater than a decade for usage to reach half of consumers? Some estimate it took just seven years. Others have argued adoption never reached 50 percent after a decade.

And depending on how one defines “smartphone,” adoption levels of 50 percent took a couple of decades to nearly three decades.



For all such reasons, some of us tend to discount the notion of a “year of X.” Truly-significant innovations which achieve mass usage often take longer than expected to reach mass adoption levels. On the other hand, there arguably are points in time when public awareness seems to reach something like an inflection point.

In most cases it is difficult to measure the actual year when a shift becomes significant. Is it the point where 10 percent of people recognize a term, or say it is important? Or when 20 percent, 30 percent or 40 percent say so?

More significantly, at what point of innovation purchase or regular usage has something “arrived,” in a commercial sense?

Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Sometimes Market Share Conceals More than it Reveals

As useful as market share analysis might be, it fails to capture the underlying market dynamics when a disruption is underway. Consider that, after nearly two decades, online commerce claims only about seven percent of total retail commerce volume.

Most of us, asked to evaluate the potential impact of a substitute technology platform that has gotten only seven percent share after nearly two decades would likely say that technology is not a major disruptor of the legacy platform.

But we would be quite wrong. If history is a useful guide, we are about three share points away from a decisive change in the adoption rate--and market share--of the new platform.

The reason for that assertion is that, in the past, transformative technologies and successful consumer electronics innovations hit an inflection point at 10 percent adoption, no matter how incremental the prior moves had seemed.

This chart by Asymco shows adoption rates of popular consumer products after 10 percent adoption was reached, no matter how long the gestation.


As you probably would expect, particular products introduced into developed ecosystems tend to be adopted faster, while products that require further development of an ecosystem can take longer to reach 10-percent adoption rates. Automobiles required a huge infrastructure of roads and gas stations.

The telephone required network economics, as the value of having a phone line was fairly low, for most users, when few other people had them. Likewise, supplying electricity required power plants and transmission lines, plus local power distribution networks.


And though it is a lesser point, as in some other markets, online commerce represents virtually 100 percent of the net growth.

Now consider a situation where multiple disruptive technologies are developing simultaneously, and where the net value which can be produced is an interaction between and among those technologies.

Big data now requires cloud computing. Big data will get bigger as internet of things sensors are widely deployed. So only artificial intelligence can sift through all the data to discern useful patterns.

And some of that data will have to be analyzed fast enough that edge computing is necessary. But 5G and other connectivity solutions will be needed to acquire all the data.

It is nearly impossible for a human to model all the possible interactions with enough detail to make the output useful. From a mobile operator’s point of view, it might be logical to put 5G at the center.

Other industries are going to put AI, or cloud, or IoT or big data at the center. No matter. The point is that the cluster of technologies is what really matters, not any single one of the technology trends.

In the past, it has been easier to model the impact of a single innovation (personal computer, mobile phone, internet). It will be much harder in the coming era, since so many fundamentally disruptive technologies are emerging at the same time.



AI, Edge Computing, 5G, Big Data Analytics, IoT are All Parts of A Single Transformation

Artificial intelligence, edge computing, cloud computing, gigabit mobile networks (5G and others), internet of things and big data all are key trends across many industries.

What we tend to miss, as so much change is happening, is simply that so much change is coming. It is better to view the cluster of innovations as the big change, and not so much the disruption each separate trend represents.

For it is the cluster of technologies that is so unusual. In the past, it has been easier to model the impact of a single innovation (personal computer, mobile phone, internet). It will be much harder in the coming era, since so many fundamentally disruptive technologies are emerging at the same time.

Big data now requires cloud computing. Big data will get bigger as internet of things sensors are widely deployed. So only artificial intelligence can sift through all the data to discern useful patterns.

And some of that data will have to be analyzed fast enough that edge computing is necessary. But 5G and other connectivity solutions will be needed to acquire all the data.

It is nearly impossible for a human to model all the possible interactions with enough detail to make the output useful. From a mobile operator’s point of view, it might be logical to put 5G at the center.

Other industries are going to put AI, or cloud, or IoT or big data at the center. No matter. The point is that the cluster of technologies is what really matters, not any single one of the technology trends.

In this unusual situation, impact will not be measured by market share stats. The percentage of work loads, the location of work load processing, the number of sensors and connections, the use of analytics and machine learning systems will fail to tell the full story.



As useful as market share analysis might be, it fails to capture the underlying market dynamics when a disruption is underway. Consider that, after nearly two decades, online commerce claims only about seven percent of total retail commerce volume.


Most of us, asked to evaluate the potential impact of a substitute technology platform that has gotten only seven percent share after nearly two decades would likely say that technology is not a major disruptor of the legacy platform.


But we would be quite wrong. If history is a useful guide, we are about three share points away from a decisive change in the adoption rate--and market share--of the new platform.


The reason for that assertion is that, in the past, transformative technologies and successful consumer electronics innovations hit an inflection point at 10 percent adoption, no matter how incremental the prior moves had seemed.


This chart by Asymco shows adoption rates of popular consumer products after 10 percent adoption was reached, no matter how long the gestation.




As you probably would expect, particular products introduced into developed ecosystems tend to be adopted faster, while products that require further development of an ecosystem can take longer to reach 10-percent adoption rates. Automobiles required a huge infrastructure of roads and gas stations.


The telephone required network economics, as the value of having a phone line was fairly low, for most users, when few other people had them. Likewise, supplying electricity required power plants and transmission lines, plus local power distribution networks.




And though it is a lesser point, as in some other markets, online commerce represents virtually 100 percent of the net growth.
source: www.nielsen.com

Researchers have been predicting for several decades that computing is going to be pervasive. What we are seeing is the realization of that prediction. Some say "fourth industrial revolution" is coming. Some of us might simply say the era of pervasive computing, as predicted, is arriving.

It is not simply "production" that is going to be affected, affecting industries and economics. Human consumption, lifestyles and behaviors are going to change, as well. This is big, very big.

AI Will Improve Productivity, But That is Not the Biggest Possible Change

Many would note that the internet impact on content media has been profound, boosting social and online media at the expense of linear form...