Due to continued financial crisis, it has been reported recently that wearable device manufacturer Jawbone is planning to sell, and Jawbone's main lender BlackRock has reduced the company's stock value from the original $5.97 per share to less than one cent per share. .
As we all know, around 2011, with Silicon Valley as the center, wearable devices began the commercialization process with the sports bracelet as the entry point, and Jawbone once took the lead. To this end, "Connected" magazine even wrote in 2014 that from a design point of view, Jawbone's new ideas may be better than Apple, which is exactly the threat to Apple, Apple should acquire Jawbone. Then, just over two years ago, it was Jawbone who walked into the dead end. Apple certainly did not acquire Jawbone but released its own smart watch. So what is the reason for Jawbone to fall from the peak to the bottom? In addition to the subjective factors of lack of innovation and rival competition as the outside world is concerned, is it related to the objective factors of the wearable device industry itself?
In fact, we only need to observe a little, and in addition to Jawbone, other companies that seem to be in the wearable device market are not as good as they seem.
For example, as the current leader in the market for wearable devices (by shipment), according to statistics, as of the end of 2015, Fitbit’s “active users†increased from 6.7 million in the previous year to 16.9 million, with a growth rate of over 150%. However, the total number of users of Fitbit is 29 million, which means that FibTIt's active users account for only 58% (16.9 million), and 42% of users buy Fitbit but use less. It should be noted that the situation of Fitbit is quite representative. According to the US market research firm NPD Group, about 40% of sports bracelet users choose to opt out 6 months after purchasing such equipment.
As for the second-ranked millet in the wearable device (bangle), although it achieved 12 million wearable devices in 2015, it surged 951.8% compared with the previous year's 1.1 million. The share also rose from 4.0% to 15.4%. However, from the changes in market share data for each quarter of 2015, Xiaomi reached the peak of market share in the first quarter of 2015, but fell in the fourth quarter, and the sales of Xiaomi grew rapidly, mainly due to the fact that Its price strategy, the price of its health bracelet is generally between $11 and $20.
I don't know what the industry has seen from the above statistics? What we see is that, on the surface, the shipment of wearable devices is growing, but due to the value (sports, sleep, diet, and interaction with friends), and many features are used, Depending on the statistics and analysis of mobile phones, the health monitoring data can be obtained. In fact, the user's stickiness to wearable devices is not high, and this will inevitably lead to the increase in surface shipments actually obtained at low prices. The value of high shipments (from a revenue and profit perspective) is not high. This is evident from the fact that Fitbit's first-quarter profit fell by 77% in the first quarter of this year, and Xiaomi's official negligible remarks about its bracelet revenue.
In contrast, what we see is that many smartphones integrate sports and fitness functions. In other words, a wristband with only a motion sensor and a single function will no longer be popular. Smartphones will gradually replace these simple devices. This is an inevitable trend, that is, devices such as sports bracelets will eventually be integrated with low-power. Replaced by a sensor-consuming smartphone. Ultimately, motion monitoring devices that can survive in the market must have more advanced hardware features, and these devices must have performance beyond the smartphone, otherwise it is difficult to survive.
Referring to the functionality of wearable devices (such as wristbands) (compared to smartphones), a recent study by the University of Pennsylvania shows that smart phones are accurate enough for step-by-step applications and are comparable in precision to wearable devices. Even better. In the research report, the counting function of several apps was counted, the error was between -6.7% and 6.2%, and the error of the wearable device was between -22.7% and 1.5%. Finally, the research team's suggestion is that more than 65% of adults carry smartphones with them, and the popularity of wearables is less than 2%. The phone can be used as a universal health tracking device. That is to say, the wearable device is not a necessity.
In addition to the above-mentioned performance and function deficiencies compared with smartphones, the wearable device manufacturers themselves have their own products that are insufficiency in innovation and lead to a decline in value.
For example, researchers at California State University of Technology recently released a research report saying that the heart rate tracker data for the Fitbit bracelet is "seriously inaccurate." The university's researchers tested 43 healthy adults using Fitbit's Surge watch and Charge HR bracelet. Subjects will be connected to a BioHarness portable physiological signal measurement system capable of producing an electrocardiogram to record the user's heart rate data for comparison with data acquired by the Fitbit device. Through the comparison of heart rate data between the user's rest and motion, the researchers found that when the user is exercising at high intensity, Fitbit's device will misjudge the user's heartbeat data, increasing the average number of times per minute by 20 times. Therefore, Fitbit devices cannot be used to provide meaningful user heart rate measurements.
Coincidentally, an independent survey released by Boll State University and WTHR Television in early India showed that the Fitbit Charge HR calculation of user heart rate data is not accurate, with an average false positive rate of 14%. According to the report, it is very dangerous to report 20 or 30 times per minute on heart rate, especially for those with heart disease.
If the above-mentioned bracelet manufacturers and products that occupy most of the market for wearable devices have hidden concerns about the development of the industry, the smart watches that have been expected by the industry to explode are all on the surface. It is difficult to maintain. According to IDC, in the second quarter of this year, global smartwatch shipments were 3.5 million, down 32% from 5.1 million in the same period last year, the first time since the record decline. Among them, Apple's market share dropped from 72% to 47%, and sales fell by more than half to 1.6 million, compared with less than 1 million for all other manufacturers. In this regard, the US mainstream online media BI believes that from the current point of view, it is not only the Apple Watch that fails, but the wearable device market in the broad sense. So far, no company other than niche sports enthusiasts has given reasons to make it difficult for consumers to refuse to buy a smart watch or sports bracelet.
In summary, we believe that Jawbone's fall can not be seen as a simple lack of competitiveness of the company itself. In fact, the entire wearable device market is facing the pain of market and user demand, and even the basic innovation and improvement of the actual The challenge of value (users and vendors themselves).
Trolley Music System,Wireless Trolley Speaker,15 Inch Trolley Speaker,Waterproof Bluetooth Speaker
Newmax Electronics Co.,LTD , https://www.fspeaker.com