Has Apple Jumped The Shark?
There’s a famous moment in 1970s television sitcom lore when the super-popular “Happy Days” lost its mojo. That moment is when the main character and hero, Arthur Fonzarelli (“The Fonze”), performs the improbable water-ski trick of jumping over a shark. Now, I’m an avid water-skiier, and I’ve been known to jump a Loon or two, but jumping over a shark is so absurd its laughable. The video clip, which I embed below, underscores how ridiculous the feat is with Fonzie still in his (dry) leather jacket.
In the common vernacular, “jump the shark” has come to symbolize that moment when something or someone has peaked and where the over-exposure gets to the point where it’s all downhill from here.
I am beginning to wonder if Apple has jumped the shark.
First, they pass Microsoft in market capitalization to become the most valuable technology company in the world. Then they purchase Quattro Wireless to enter into the advertising business, attempting to box out Google. Then they launch the iPhone 4 a mere few months after the iPad. Both are heralded as the most successful product launches in the history of technology.
But in the last few weeks, there have been a few signs that perhaps they have peaked and come to their “jump the shark” moment. Here are few signs that stand out:
The iPhone 4 feels like a rushed product and, although selling well, is getting poor critical reviews. Consumer Reports slammed it for the bad reception and took the company to task (“We can’t recommend the iPhone 4″).
Perhaps more worrying for Apple is Google’s declaration of war and the success of Android. Apple and Google are competing for the hearts of developers and advertisers as well as consumers, and the battle appears to be tilting. Many commentators are ironically observing that Android may be to the iPhone what Microsoft Windows was to the Mac – an open platform that simply wins over time on volume because of its superior ecosystem.
Many people forget that Google acquired Android in 2005 – even before the iPhone was launched. Google has been working on developing a dominant position as the open platform for mobile computing for many years, probably not even knowing that Apple would be their main rival (more likely Microsoft, in fact). So it should not be such a surprise when people begin to recognize that Android is really working. According to Quantcast, Android has 21% market share in June for smart phones as compared to Apple’s 58%. The Android numbers are growing fast, and this is just US figures. Android arguably has already established a superior position in the international market given their breadth of OEM and carrier partners.
What has struck me most recently are the conversations I’m having with entrepreneurs and industry leaders about Apple. Yesterday a mobile start-up CEO told me that when Apple declared that they would block app vendors from collecting device data to use for personalization and targeted advertising, he decided to pivot his start-up to focus solely on Android. Android app numbers have been widely reported this week as growing remarkably fast and Android app usage is growing faster than Apple.
The president of a mobile advertising agency told me last week that he believes Google/Android will win the battle because it represents the more effective, and better-known, advertising targeting paradigm – search-based vs. apps-based. The debate here is whether better targeted advertising will be based on what applications I’m using (and what songs I’m listening to on iTunes), which is what Apple is betting on, or will better targeted advertising be driven from search. If Google succeeds in leveraging mobile search data on devices to inform mobile advertising within apps, it will be very powerful and both advertisers and publishers will flock their way.
A possible Trojan Horse in the mobile platform wars is HTML5. Apple was quick to push HTML5 as a new standard on the iPhone over Flash, perhaps out of genuine frustration with what Steve Jobs refers to as a “buggy battery hog”. But in promoting HTML5, Jobs may be inadvertently encouraging developers to build cross-platform applications that are elegantly dynamic and browser-based rather than app-based. If Android continues to get momentum, and HTML5 continues to gain in popularity, it might behoove application vendors to develop broswer-based applications that run cross-platform rather than silo’d iPhone apps. Search-based targeting. Browser-based apps built in an open, cross-platform environment. Guess who wins that battle in the long run? Strategy 101 says the arena in which you choose to battle a competitor is as important as how you conduct the battle. Apple has chosen HTML5, an open platform, to battle Google for supremacy on mobile. This seems like an unwise choice for Apple in retrospect.
Apple has called a special press conference tomorrow, most likely to address the antenna issue for the iPhone 4. Watch the body language carefully. If it’s defensive, closed and full of denial, you may be seeing another sign that Apple has jumped the shark. That doesn’t mean the company will decline quickly – after all, Happy Days continued for 7 more years after that ridiculous episode. It just means the summer of 2010 will be remembered as the moment Apple peaked.
Here’s the video. Enjoy!
Jeff is a partner with Boston-based VC firm Flybridge Capital Partners. Read his past peHUB posts, or follow him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/bussgang.




mlstotts said on July 15, 2010
It’s good you note GOOG ‘s ’05 acquisition of Android which at the time appeared to be another front in the war with MSFT. Almost a year to the day later, Schmidt joined AAPL ‘s board, 4 months later iPhone announced; iPhone ships 10 months after Schmidt joins the board.
Today Android provides a consumer UX and performance equivalent to the iPhone and a business opportunity nearly, if not equally, compelling to developers. Android is good enough; and maybe good enough is enough. I continue to believe that ubiquity across markets, not dominance in each market is the key to GOOG ‘s success. (Ubiquity equals utility equals use.)
AAPL ‘s complete control of the platform and device has allowed them to accelerate and define markets (MP3 players, digital music, smartphones, mobile “apps”), but it also leaves them highly vulnerable to a single point of failure. This is especially true in smartphones where they have only released a single device (where’s the Nano Phone?). What happens if the next generation of device fails to meet or exceed expectations? We are about to see at tomorrow’s press conference.
Hopefully there will be someone at Apple’s iPhone 4 press conference with the guts to ask for Ruben Caballero’s point of view. According to Bloomberg BusinessWeek Caballero is the “Apple Engineer Said to Tell Jobs IPhone Antenna Might Cut Calls” – http://bit.ly/c7yspo
p.s. Jeff – enjoyed the book!
Aymerik said on July 15, 2010
“The iPhone 4 feels like a rushed product and, although selling well, is getting poor critical reviews. Consumer Reports slammed it for the bad reception and took the company to task (â€We can’t recommend the iPhone 4″).”
That is not a very objective way of presenting the data. Despite the antenna issue, the iPhone 4 is CR’s highest rated smart phone:
From CR’s web site: “The signal problem is the reason that we did not cite the iPhone 4 as a “recommended” model, even though its score in our other tests placed it atop the latest Ratings of smart phones that were released today.The iPhone scored high, in part because it sports the sharpest display and best video camera we’ve seen on any phone, and even outshines its high-scoring predecessors with improved battery life and such new features as a front-facing camera for video chats and a built-in gyroscope that turns the phone into a super-responsive game controller.”
That is hardly a poor critical review. Reviews have been extremely positive across major media publications, as well a tech blogs.
I’m not sure how one can conclude that the product was rushed. The phone added a second camera, HD video, the mobile industry’s best screen by far, a custom, faster processor, great battery life improvement, a slicker form factor better reception is most use cases then it’s predecessor, and a significant feature upgraded in its OS. Ambitious yes, but that level of functionality and feature support doesn’t indicate a product that has been rushed. Compare that to the HTC EVO, with a battery that drains ludicrously fast if 4G is used. That’s more a sign of a rushed product. They sent it to market before the core technology was mature enough to support a decent consumer experience.
The antenna issue is fairly minor, as even skeptical tech columnists like Larry Magid have pointed out. It affects some folks holding the phone in a very particular way, in areas with poor reception. Granted, it’s unfortunately worse for left-handed folk, since it’s more likely they will hold the phone that way. If anything, the iPhone 4 is more a reflection of the compromises Apple sometimes makes in the design area. The irony is that for most users, the esthetically pleasing external antenna system yields better reception. I use an iPhone 4, and I’m getting vastly better WiFi signal range, for instance.
Also, the Windows vs Mac argument is tired and simplistic. By that argument, the iPod should never have been a success, since so many “open” MP3 players existed, and MS was competing its PlaysForSure MP3 ecosystem in place, with its family of devices from multiple partners.
On the cell phone front, Windows Mobile and CE, with a great variety of hardware partners, had been in place for years before the iPhone was launched. By the Windows vs Mac argument, Ballmer would have been correct in saying that the iPhone would never get any meaningful market share.
On the console front, MS, Sony, and Nintendo all have closed consoles, yet we don’t see any threats from the number of Linux-powered systems out there. The 3DO was the closest thing to an open console platform, with hardware provided by Panasonic, LG, Sanyo, and even Creative Labs (as a PC add-in card). By the “many versus 1″ logic, the 3DO should have dominated versus Nintendo and Sega (Sony re-entered the race later on with its PlayStation). By the same logic, the MSX game system, supported by Microsoft with a number of hardware partners such as Sony, Philips, Sanyo, SpectraVideo, and close to a dozen others, should never have let Nintendo Famicom/NES dominate.
Where I do agree with your Windows Vs Mac model is in the consumer and developer frustration arena, caused by fragmentation of the platform. That’s already challenging for developers to handle, and it’s going to get worse as manufacturers and carriers vary software modules, interface elements, and hardware components. Just handling screen sizes and input methods is getting to be a bear.
At the end of the day though, this isn’t a winner takes all situation. Windows is still around, and Mac OS X is doing better than ever, especially when one looks at Apple’s share of the profits in the computer industry. If that is the worst-case scenario for Apple, it’s not that bad…
TIm Dick said on July 15, 2010
Wait until the first pervasive Android virus strikes due to lack of QA for third-party apps. Some Android viruses already exist that quietly dial & redial phone #s, take address lists, and send spam TXT messages to address books. They have not propagated well because Android does not yet have a big installed base – but as pointed out, that is changing.
Consumers put up with viruses on PCs because there was no other device that could do what a PC does. However people are not used to putting up with viruses on their phones, game consoles, TVs, MP3 players, automobiles and other “appliances.”
Will Google attempt to step back in and rebottle the genie to fix the likely virus storm? Not unless it is willing to take away Android’s open ecosystem.
He who laughs last?
Alphaholic said on July 15, 2010
You explaining to us what “jump the shark” means is PE Hub jumping the shark!
Jeff Bussgang said on July 15, 2010
Alphaholic – ouch! Wasn’t sure everyone was a Happy Days fan. You have to admit, most know the phrase, but haven’t seen the video!
Tim – the vulnerability to security threats and viruses is a really interesting question. That will be interesting to see how that plays out.
Aymerik – Consumer Reports was indeed critical about the antenna, but you are right, it’s a great product. The question of whether the product was rushed is a good one, but the fact that it was a surprise that this flaw existed implies that it was missed in the test cycle. We’ll see what Jobs says tomorrow.
Bob Allard said on July 19, 2010
Hi, Jeff- Longtime/first time…
“As a fan of Happy Days, Apple and Google, I feel uniquely invested in this argument,” he writes from his MacBook after clicking though PEHub in Gmail on Chrome while listening to music on his iPhone.
It is indeed possible that Apple has peaked, jumped, etc. from crazy get-in-line to get the next device fanboy crowds to just Coke/Nike/McDonald’s-level brand awesomeness. And one wonders how much of Apple is tied to Steve Jobs’ genius versus a corporation-level culture that will thrive after he’s gone. (past experience is not very positive).
Although competitors in some areas, Google and Apple are both creating terrific solutions to today’s and tomorrow’s problems, and there is plenty of room for them both at the top. Of course, #1 is important in any category, but the categories themselves are evolving and multiplying so quickly as to make it a little hard to tell how winning and losing looks to the shareholders.
One anecdotal point that might offer a slightly different viewpoint is in areas yet to be delivered. A friend runs a home automation software firm, and when I asked him who the Big player there will be in 5 years as it goes from $100k+ custom Crestron, etc. projects to <$10k systems, and he said without a pause: Apple. How big is that brand new market is still yet to be determined, of course, but my point is that there’s a lot of room at the new top, which is way more interesting than just fighting for the old one.
men's winter boots timberland said on January 17, 2011
Zip the Dee mini pops are the very best! I bought them thinking we were looking at some new pop and when I bought home I saw the actual charms logo but regardless they are my favorite now! at any time I see them I order them! Bravo!
jocuri gratis said on January 27, 2011
I’m not sure how one can conclude that the product was rushed. The phone added a second camera, HD video, the mobile industry’s best screen by far, a custom, faster processor, great battery life improvement, a slicker form factor better reception is most use cases then it’s predecessor, and a significant feature upgraded in its OS. Ambitious yes, but that level of functionality and feature support doesn’t indicate a product that has been rushed. Compare that to the HTC EVO, with a battery that drains ludicrously fast if 4G is used. That’s more a sign of a rushed product. They sent it to market before the core technology was mature enough to support a decent consumer experience.
AKO Webmail said on January 5, 2012
Considerably, this post is really the sweetest on this notable topic. I harmonise with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your incoming updates. Saying thanks will not just be sufficient, for the phenomenal clarity in your writing. I will directly grab your rss feed to stay informed of any updates. Admirable work and much success in your business dealings! Please excuse my poor English as it is not my first tongue.