Market Crash for a Wall Street Hero
This article was first published by dmcityview.com
Over the last year and a half American eardrums have been beset by an unending sound, Taylor Swift’s massively successful album “1989.” The record has spawn 6 culture shaking singles each with YouTube videos views well into the hundreds of millions. There is little question that Swift is the biggest pop star on the planet. But when you discover that up to 2015 summer the album had only sold five million copies in the U.S. something seems off. In a country of 319 million people it seems odd that the biggest album of the last few years is sitting in less than .01% of American homes. The popular-versus-omnipresent phenomena is not uncommon and in technology there is no company currently feeling it worse than GoPro.
In October 2014 –when Taylor Swift’s 1989 hit shelves– the coolest company in action cameras was the darling of wall street. Its stock was worth nearly four times its initial public offering and traders were ecstatic about the future of the company. Today, a year and half after making its wall street debut at $24, GoPro stock is trading at 11 bucks and falling. How could the Taylor Swift of action cameras be valued so low? Doesn’t everyone in America either own a GoPro or wants to own one?
Oddly enough the parallels between Swift and GoPro go even deeper. Some of the most innovative views on YouTube have been shot using GoPro cameras and the devices are starting to be used in major films like Transformers and The Martian; however, just because something's popular doesn’t mean it’s omnipresent. While its cameras are extremely popular among the videography and filmmaking communities, GoPro has never broken through to the mainstream consumer market. Hoping to finally make that transition it deviated from its landmark “Hero” line of cameras and released a new model dubbed the “Session.” With ease of use in mind and nearly all the features of a traditional GoPro baked in the new camera seemed destined to fly off store shelves.
If only that had been the case. The Session was almost an immediate failure with cameras trickling into the market, generating little buzz. Fingers could be pointed at multiple reasons for its false start, but the big mistake was the price. Almost annually GoPro has released an upgraded version of its camera. Better image, small design, and always introduced around $400 to $500. GoPro did not deviate from this sales model with the Session release and a fatal error.
Prosumer level products should come at a higher price point, users are expecting to pay more for a higher level product. Consumer level products should be affordable. Why would a casual video taker spend $400 on a new device when they can take great video with their smartphone, tablet, or point-and-shoot camera? Eventually GoPro realized its error and halved the price of the Session, albeit far too late to inform would-be GoPro buyers before the all-important holiday shopping. So instead of celebrating millions of good little girls and boys opening up brand new Sessions on Christmas morning, GoPro is panicking from a fatal product launch; laying off 7% of it's workforce and reassuring angry stockholders it can recover.
Unlike Taylor Swift, GoPro can’t simply put out new product on a whim. GoPro is a camera company and a misstep the only marketplace it operates in can be lethal. If Swift’s next single is a sour one, she could overcome it in a couple months, but GoPro’s next release doesn’t set the market on fire it could be curtains for the action camera king.
Patrick Boberg is a central Iowa creative media specialist. For more tech insights, follow him on Twitter @PatBoBomb
Over the last year and a half American eardrums have been beset by an unending sound, Taylor Swift’s massively successful album “1989.” The record has spawn 6 culture shaking singles each with YouTube videos views well into the hundreds of millions. There is little question that Swift is the biggest pop star on the planet. But when you discover that up to 2015 summer the album had only sold five million copies in the U.S. something seems off. In a country of 319 million people it seems odd that the biggest album of the last few years is sitting in less than .01% of American homes. The popular-versus-omnipresent phenomena is not uncommon and in technology there is no company currently feeling it worse than GoPro.
In October 2014 –when Taylor Swift’s 1989 hit shelves– the coolest company in action cameras was the darling of wall street. Its stock was worth nearly four times its initial public offering and traders were ecstatic about the future of the company. Today, a year and half after making its wall street debut at $24, GoPro stock is trading at 11 bucks and falling. How could the Taylor Swift of action cameras be valued so low? Doesn’t everyone in America either own a GoPro or wants to own one?
Oddly enough the parallels between Swift and GoPro go even deeper. Some of the most innovative views on YouTube have been shot using GoPro cameras and the devices are starting to be used in major films like Transformers and The Martian; however, just because something's popular doesn’t mean it’s omnipresent. While its cameras are extremely popular among the videography and filmmaking communities, GoPro has never broken through to the mainstream consumer market. Hoping to finally make that transition it deviated from its landmark “Hero” line of cameras and released a new model dubbed the “Session.” With ease of use in mind and nearly all the features of a traditional GoPro baked in the new camera seemed destined to fly off store shelves.
If only that had been the case. The Session was almost an immediate failure with cameras trickling into the market, generating little buzz. Fingers could be pointed at multiple reasons for its false start, but the big mistake was the price. Almost annually GoPro has released an upgraded version of its camera. Better image, small design, and always introduced around $400 to $500. GoPro did not deviate from this sales model with the Session release and a fatal error.
Prosumer level products should come at a higher price point, users are expecting to pay more for a higher level product. Consumer level products should be affordable. Why would a casual video taker spend $400 on a new device when they can take great video with their smartphone, tablet, or point-and-shoot camera? Eventually GoPro realized its error and halved the price of the Session, albeit far too late to inform would-be GoPro buyers before the all-important holiday shopping. So instead of celebrating millions of good little girls and boys opening up brand new Sessions on Christmas morning, GoPro is panicking from a fatal product launch; laying off 7% of it's workforce and reassuring angry stockholders it can recover.
Unlike Taylor Swift, GoPro can’t simply put out new product on a whim. GoPro is a camera company and a misstep the only marketplace it operates in can be lethal. If Swift’s next single is a sour one, she could overcome it in a couple months, but GoPro’s next release doesn’t set the market on fire it could be curtains for the action camera king.
Patrick Boberg is a central Iowa creative media specialist. For more tech insights, follow him on Twitter @PatBoBomb
.HEIC)
Comments
Post a Comment