Search Follow us
4 April 2017 · 2 min read

Android’s success shows up Google’s deficiencies

Android has surpassed Windows as the No.1 platform for accessing the Internet globally, highlighting just how bad Google is at monetising Android as it remains only a small percentage of total revenues.

We think that this could be a growth opportunity if Google can fix the many problems that exist within the system that it created and in many cases controls.

According to StatCounter, Android devices now make up 37.93% of all Internet access devices very slightly ahead of Microsoft Windows at 37.91% with iOS a distant third at around 13%. Furthermore, with most users spending more time on smartphones and tablets than PCs, it is clear that the PC is rapidly becoming a device used in the enterprise and by content creators. This is a major reason why Edison does not consider PC usage as a contributor to Digital Life when assessing the addressable market for a digital consumer ecosystem. Consequently, it would be natural to assume that Android is a big part of Google’s revenues but in reality, it is not.

Edison estimates that in 2016 just 19% of advertising revenues came from Android devices compared to PCs and Macs which generated 60% of advertising revenues. A further 19% of revenues came from iOS devices despite the fact that there are 2.9 Android devices for every 1 iOS device. This tells me that the PC is a much better platform for advertising monetisation but it is also a clear indication that Google is doing something very wrong when it comes to making money from Android.

We have long argued that while demographics plays a role, the endemic fragmentation of Android and Google’s inability to update software on its own devices severely hinders the usage of and loyalty to, the Android platform. We believe that this is a major reason why an Android device generates less than half the revenues that an iOS device does which is also meaningfully less than a PC or Mac. While this is a real black eye for Google, we also see it as an opportunity. Edison estimates that in Q4 16A each iOS user delivered $3.37 in revenues for Google compared to $1.47 on Android. If Google could fix the problems with Android, then we think that there could be meaningful upside to this number. For example, if Google was able to increase monetisation of its own Android devices to $2.00 per user per month, this would increase revenues by $6.4bn on an annualised basis.

As smartphone user growth and usage both slows, Google will need to look for growth elsewhere and we see this as an obvious place to start. We are hoping to see signs of this at Google i/o (in May) but in the preview of Android O, we were disappointed. Without these kinds of actions we think that Alphabet remains fully valued and would prefer the shares of Microsoft, Tencent and Baidu.

Disclaimer - Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Inherent in any investment is the potential for loss. This material is being provided for informational purposes only and nothing herein constitutes investment, legal, accounting or tax advice, or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold a security. This document may contain materials from third parties, which are supplied by companies that are not affiliated with Edison Investment Research. Edison Investment Research has not been involved in the preparation, adoption or editing of such third-party materials and does not explicitly or implicitly endorse or approve such content. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. It should not be assumed that any investments in securities, companies, sectors or markets identified and described were or will be profitable. All information is current as of the date of publication and is subject to change without notice. While based on sources believed reliable, we do not represent this material as accurate or complete. Any views or opinions expressed may not reflect those of the firm as a whole. Edison Investment Research does not engage in investment banking, market making or asset management activities of any securities. The material has not been prepared in accordance with the legal requirements designed to promote the independence or objectivity of investment research.