Compare the business models and core competencies of Google

Compare the business models and core competencies of Google, Apple, and Facebook.

Solution

Google leads on online advertisement & online search

Facebook leads on social engagement & Advertisement

Apple leads on standard of device interface Hardware sales mobile gadgets

Business Models

Google

How does this company called google actually make their money?The brand google isthe baddest and biggest advertising company in the world there is.To throw some provenstasctics; about 96.6% of the actual revenue is produced by just advertising.Last yearalone, google reported that they received more than $28 billion just for advertisement.Google is a goddess when it comes to the internet. Gmail, Google Maps, Chrome,Location Tracker, Smart TV’s, and the most popular of all Google Search.Googlesbusiness model as a whole makes them money by selling ads on all the free Internetservices it provides to the entire world.

Facebook

Facebook is the greatest world leading Social Networking Site. The mission of Facebook is to make the world a more open, social and more connected with the people that are the closet to you. Facebook helps users stay connected with family, old classmates, job opportunities, and colleagues new and old. It helps discover hot topics and what is going on the world on an updated minute bases. It encourages and helps people to express themselves from sharing their opinions about different trending topics to sharing recipes, ideas, videos and photos. Facebook is free of charge and provides numerous products

Apple

Although google has revolutionized the Internet usability, let’s take a deeper look into apple and how they are not too far behind in the technology world. Apple has been busy conducting its own revolution with innovative products like the IPod, IPhone and IPad. Apple’s business model is grounded upon the foundation of just the device, sells itself.“Integrated model”. Yes! Apple definitely has the popular software and for sure the applications. However, the majority of their revenue is generated from their from scratch well-designed and innovative devices. They both have their differences, but the both of them of very profitable

Core Competancies

Google’s core competency is solving complex and big data problems. They used this to create an amazing search engine, a terrific map product and are applying it to other interesting problems translation and self-driving cars. I view Google as more of a R&D lab. The company is really great for investigating complex problem spaces, but not so strong as converting their solutions into viable businesses. 96% of their revenues are generated from their search related ad technology – they have not been able to convert a lot of the R&D into real revenues.

Facebook’s core competency was social graphs and networks. They really understood how and why people connect. Using this knowledge they were able to build a product where people kept pulling in friends and family keeping the social network growing. The reason I state this in the past tense is because I notice that I am not as active on Facebook anymore. As the social network has evolved over time, it has not been able to keep my level of engagement high and I notice this amongst my friends also. For example something as simple as photo sharing isn’t as easy and as much fun to do on Facebook as it is on Instagram.

Apple’s core competency is designing experiences. Today, Apple is miles ahead of the competition in designing experiences that delight the customer with products like the iPOD and iPhone. However designing experiences has been its core strength from the start, beginning with the Macintosh computer. Designing the kind of polished end to end experiences that Apple delivers takes great restraint - the ability to ruthlessly cut features that are incomplete or unpolished. When they launched the first iPhone, the phone did not have the ‘Cut and Paste’ feature that any other competitor would have considered a necessary feature. However Apple probably did not have a good enough implementation of this feature and hence decide to release a product minus a key feature. The important thing is that the features that they did ship worked flawlessly end to end.