Google buys Fitbit for $2.1 billion

Isn’t the google health app called Fit? Fitbit is a natural

The Google health app needs to go away. The Fitbit app is far better when it comes to health tracking.

I have a feeling it’s gonna be the other way around. It’ll be like Nest: it’ll stay a separate brand for now, but Google is gonna eventually integrate the brand into the Google brand and kill off the Fitbit app and require users to migrate over to Google Fit.

Except that isn’t what happened. The "brand" was subsumed, but the Nest app is very much alive and well, albeit with the one change to integrate with Google’s user account credentials (which no one should be surprised by and I’m surprised didn’t happen earlier)

Its Google, not Alphabet. The purchase was announced by Google’s hardware group on a Google blog.

I mean there is no reason to have Fitbit as its own company under Alphabet. Look at what happened to Nest. They can in the future spin off wearables and home products in the future if they gain popularity and catch on but I don’t know if it necessary. If you look at Youtube, that should be spun out of Google but its not.

And … the fact that it is Google not Alphabet means that Fitbits will be used for data gathering to enhance Google’s ad revenue.

I read the article – they say that Fitbit health and wellness data won’t be used for ads. Two points here. There is a lot of data generated that isn’t "health and wellness", and what is true today may not be true a year from now.

Everything Google does is to collect data to sell ads. Period.

Not true. They are pouring billions into the cloud, in fact they missed in earnings this quarter because the spending on cloud was so much. They added Google one storage and removed original uploads from the Pixel. Put more attention to hardware. It’s obvious they are trying hard to diversify.

They are spending in cloud because AWS and Azure are eating their lunch and Alibaba came out of nowhere and is bigger as a cloud provider.

And the health data they can’t do much with legally but this is not a purchase expected to generate revenue based on what Fitbit does right now,

"Everything Google does is to collect data to sell ads. Period."

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of their business. Further, they don’t need Fitbid to sell ads. The tracking occurs on the smartphone. Last I checked, Fitbids are not standalone devices.

Alphabet/Google is a machine learning/AI company. Advertising is an application. Logistics is an application. Self-driving cars is an application. Drug discovery is an application. Data center/cloud/edge computing is an application.

Google wants Fitbid for its data for machine learning.

Finally. A reasonable and sound voice among cackling hyenas.. +1 rec.

https://blog.google/technology/health/deepmind-health-joins-google-health/

Google have to monetize any acquisition. Whether its ad revenue or something else. But to not call google an ad company? I mean I know what you’re saying, but revenue wise that’s the majority of their income.

Alphabet’s revenue is 85% advertising, the remaining is other businesses like google cloud, Play etc. These areas appear to be growing, but its core is still advertising.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/02/alphabet-business-units-revenue-contribution-and-ceos.html

OK, if Google is so diversified, why is 95% of its revenue from advertising?

And I’m pretty sure owning Fitbit will in fact give it access to more data. Also, Android has very few decent smart watches and seriously lags behind Apple. And this means that as people migrate to Apple for a good watch, Google loses people to collect data from.

Also, at the consumer level, Google’s efforts in machine learning and AI are all about – data gathering. It’s the same for apps, home smart speakers, etc. Everything Google does is in service to expanding the consumer base from which to gather data to sell ads.

When Google gives away machine learning or incorporates it into Android, when Google gives away home speakers at cost, when Google invests billions in mapping tech, it is doing so to gather more consumers into its ecosystem and gather more data to sell ads.

If you don’t see this you are blind.

still popular doesn’t mean google didn’t make it worse. It’s better than a lot of the horrible thermostats on the market but nest is simply good when it had the promise and trajectory of being great before google.

That is your opinion. We are talking about whether it is still successful or not.

I think seeing Motorola as a fuck up really requires you to see the purchase as anything but a way to get those patents.

Those first two Moto X phones, ugh. So great.

I actually loved my Nexus 6. It was huge and relatively heavy but it had a wonderful design that felt perfect in my hand, and the case and back customization was so cool. Loved my real bamboo back.
Camera sucked though.

I had a Nexus 6 as well! It was a solid phone and I enjoyed using it, but by god was it huge.

Yes it was. I had a Dell Streak 5 waaaay back, so no stranger to massive phones.

Yeah but it was way overpriced for what they got probably just to stick it to Microsoft.

You aren’t wrong, but I think they really wanted those patents and were willing to shell out as much money as possible to get it.

Then they gave one phone a shot, it did…..not great in terms of sales, and they moved on.

Seems like MS and Google are playing nicer these days with MS embracing Android more and more.

And that blew up in their face as the patents were not ultimately very useful.

Not sure how you make the case the patents were not useful. Android was under attack. It was going to blow up. Then Google got the patents. And today Android has 85% of the market, so… For every company except Apple, selling a smartphone without Android is economic suicide.

The Motorola purchase, for $12 billion (net cost of $6 billion after divestitures), was pure genius. It ranks right up there with YouTube for $2 billion and the GooglePlus strategy to link all Google accounts.

They never intended to use the patents offensively. It was purely a defensive acquisition to prevent MS or Apple from scooping them up.

Every Android OEM is paying Microsoft a few on every device sold but Google is not because Motorola was suing Microsoft and then when it looked like Motorola was going to win they agreed to drop all lawsuits worldwide so it did help them challenge Microsoft but I am not sure if it was worth the 12 billion or whatever they paid.

Subtract what they sold Motorola for, from that price. They sold off the modem business to Arris and the rest to Lenovo.

Huge mistake still. Their phone lineup was a lot more compelling with Moto than Pixel, and now they’ve made things worse for everyone. I don’t want to go back to iPhone, but guess what?

I like Galaxy hardware too. The hidden home button is really the only compelling way to do full screen phones, and Apple’s gestures just aren’t as good iirc.

But Google software has completely lost me. Love the interface, love Android, but music? Photos? Updates? Browser privacy? Tablets? All suck.

What’s wrong with music and photos? Photos works perfectly IMO (while Apple Photos is annoying and more limited) and Music seems fine, plus Spotify is the go-to for the plurality of users worldwide. Updates are up to OEMs but that’s just how Android works and it doesn’t affect most users either way.

When is the last time you used Apple Photos?

It has changed a lot in the last two years.

Music could use an UI update for one. It looks dated. It works better on Android than iOS, which is fine but just lacking. For example, clicking the hamburger on Android has a lot more options than the iOS version so it’s easier to navigate.

I like being able to manage my playlists on the web, that’s a plus, but I wish I could sort songs by Explicit content which is not an option. Would make it easier to make a clean version playlist if I had all of the ‘cuss word’ songs lumped together. I mention this because I’m sure an ap update would go along with a web interface update.

Honestly, Fitbit is a sinking ship at the moment, too. It was going to be acquired eventually. The only two good, feasible options were Google or Microsoft.

One of whom already shut down their wearables.

FitBit is also a sinking ship if you have a look at their financials…declining YoY NET income and not profitable. Strange acquisition.

They don’t want it for its sales, they want it to integrate into Google’s hardware business.

They want it for the user days. It’s Google.

And the nights too. Wakka wakka.

Motorola was basically for patents.

Well they did I’m sure have a third option, but it would have probably been like… Nike.

That would have been a terrible scenario. All these sports equipment manufacturers dip their toes in these areas from time to time, then quickly bounce out. See, for example, the Nike Fuel wearable, which wasn’t even a bad idea in theory.

100% agree with you on that one. I don’t like all this conglomeration. Was fitbit struggling though? I see them everywhere… I thought they were doing pretty well.

I want (comparatively) small companies that offer viable alternatives and push the bigger companies to be better, not just a few titans slugging it out.

Fitbit had a chance to push the bigger companies and it’s come to this. I’m now concerned about Withings (already bought and sold by Nokia) a fitness and health focused company that I hope doesn’t come in the cross hairs of yet another big company looking for an acquisition.

In the case of wearables, OS integration and silicon are too vital, creates a huge incentive for consolidation.

I’ve wondered different times about smaller companies banding together. The Fitbit, Spotify, Snapchats of the tech industry.

Fitbit brough this on themselves. The problem was that they weren’t a "viable alternative" to the largest premium market, iPhone users. This is why Apple is now the biggest wearable seller in the market now.

Fitbit is notorious for poor build quality. Their HR monitor tech is over a half-decade old and they haven’t invested in it. I recently tested a new Fitbit, an Apple Watch, and a chest monitor for my gym. The Fitbit sometimes under-reported by over 50bpm compared to the other two.

Fitbit is notorious for poor build quality. Their HR monitor tech is over a half-decade old and they haven’t invested in it. I recently tested a new Fitbit, an Apple Watch, and a chest monitor for my gym. The Fitbit sometimes under-reported by over 50bpm compared to the other two.

Do we have any reason to suspect being acquired by Google will make this any better?

Nope. Not suggesting otherwise. If Google let’s Fitbit design the straps and hardware in a vacuum, they will surely regret it.

My last Fitbit just up and stopped working 5 months in. Their hardware is pretty poor.

I think Rick hinted that project soli can read heart rate so they might be planning on putting it into a watch. I think they are working on one, ti has been rumored countless times but it is an ongoing thing until they get it right which is fine by me. Maybe they create a new use case scenario for watches.

Please Pixel watch please please please. I have this $30 old Timex I’ve just been waiting to replace with a decent Android smartwatch. I’ve been waiting like… 3 or 4 years now.

You’re probably gonna be waiting at least another 2 years, optimistically

Unfortunately you’re probably right, I’m eyeing the new Galaxy watch since Google dropped the ball so hard on Android Wear

For now.

Of course they will. What’s the point of maintaining a separate login from Google’s pov?

Keep all the users, share the data. You know, like Waze and Google Maps.

This would be a horrible decision.

Google is doing no such thing. Google sign in is an option, but you’re not forced to use it.

Seems more likely that they to the other way, and integrate Google Fit data into the Fitbit side and then shut Google Fit down ala Google Video/YouTube.

If you rely on a piece of tech in order not to be sick or overweight, you’re doing life wrong.

Of course, companies want you to believe you can have your cake and eat it too, so they all can keep making money: the junk food companies, the pharmaceuticals, and the tech corps.

Using the tech to collect data and help you track what one does is not wrong.

Fitness trackers have already been shown that they don’t work and the people who wear them lose less weight than the people who didn’t.

https://time.com/4517033/fitness-tracker-fitbit-zip-exercise/

Because people don’t know what. ¯\(ツ)/¯

And sometimes people just want data. It’s not necessarily about losing weight.

A fitness tracker helped me stay focused. It was a mindset that it helped drive, ensuring I was being more active and helped me lose over 200 pounds.

Now I use an Apple Watch to track all my activity to ensure I am pushing hard enough. I want to find that sweet spot in a workout, for example, that will drive my endurance higher and make me a better athlete. I use the data to compare over time how well my body is working, again so I can drive myself to be a better athlete.

Classic mistake of "average vs. individual." On average, fitness trackers don’t help. At the individual level, they can save some peoples’ lives.

Microsoft has no interest in wearables.

Which is surprising to me. I wonder why they wouldn’t have made an offer.

Well Microsoft doesn’t appear to have much interest in watches, but they do have earbuds (and already have full-size headphones) coming out. I realize that when most people say "wearables" that they are referring to watches but earbuds fall into that category as well (and thanks to Amazon, Rings and Glasses do as well).

They are just so half hearted and it’s so unnecessary. Look at xbox controllers and Surfaces. They can really nail hardware when they try. Given the niches available, a watch, earbuds etc could really help them. Esp when you consider the education and corporate realms that tap into these devices. But I have no confidence they will follow through.

I’d be willing to bet we’ll see a Microsoft wearable in some form within the next 5 or so years.

Microsoft has already made clear that, outside of Surface, they have no interest in hardware like that. They are much more interested in the software side of things for things like health and wearables.

I would agree, but they did make headphones and earbuds. And now are making a phone. Who knows anymore.

First, just pointing out I said "some form." As in they’ll power it or make it — they want to be involved. Second, where has Microsoft "already made clear" that they have "no interest in hardware like that"? I haven’t seen a single comment from Microsoft indicating that.

Look at HoloLens, Surface Buds, etc. Microsoft wants to be where the industry is moving in some form.

Yeah, pretty much.

Yeah. This is the same boilerplate "it’s fine, don’t worry" every company puts out when bought out by a bigger company that doesn’t share its ideals, and it virtually every turns out to be true for all that long.

Well health data at least has some protections via HIPPA.

Some other articles (engadget) imply future Fitbits may run wear OS.

The only hardware acquisition they need is an ARM chip maker, and they’re not doing it. It’s pointless to chase these little acquisitions when Quallcomm is the real issue here.

Fitbit watches seem to run just fine on non-Qualcomm chips. So did my Pebble for that matter. Maybe the takeaway is that nobody should be using the Qualcomm 3×00 chips to begin with…

Which they won’t do because of how it would impact their ecosystem. They cannot push too hard into hardware because they will lose their edge with Android.

Wierd. I thought the Nest thermostat is the de facto smart thermostat and the Nest cam does relatively well. I’m curious why you think that acquisition was a failure?

Also, Motorola was largely a patent acquisition, as many have said. They had no interest in keeping the Motorola brand afloat.

whats the track record for nest?. it is still developing hardware under google nest and have same features and getting improved.

Google bungled their strategy for nest for years.

The brand is known. They have some really nicely designed hardware (better than most smartwatches in my opinion). Gives them an immediate hardware team with experience to work on wearables which they seem to have struggled with. I get the purchase. I don’t like the purchase but I get it.

The brand is known for making hardware that gives your wrist a rash. I can’t say I like any of their hardware design. The Versa looks like any $30 Chinese no name brand smartwatch you can find on Amazon. I just don’t get what you’re investing in from "wearables" hardware specialists. It’s not like this is a new form factor, watches have existed for centuries and they already paid billions for another hardware team.

One edit on my point above:
Declining YoY revenue is incorrect, although growth is negligible. Negative NET income is what I should have highlighted.

People use them and recognize the brand. That’s where the value is.

Declining revenue and losses mean nothing. Companies are always valued on potential, not actual results. See Amazon which makes a fraction of the profits that Google or Apple make yet is right up there in value.

They are buying a brand and user base, mostly. But can’t argue with your point that silicon is vital. They probably have to do both to play catch-up. There is still a lot of market left to capture wearables, and you can’t say that about phones.

You treat Google like a holding company…this is definitely the wrong take. They’re not buying Fitbit because it is profitable.

No, they are buying it to dismantle it taking what the useful bits are and turning into a brand.

I think you put too much weight on that. Fitness trackers don’t need a lot of CPU power. Plus if google, samsung and others are pushing this harder then chip companies will build the hardware they need.

Anything that doesn’t need a lot of CPU power won’t run WearOS.
That said, they’ll probably find a way to shove assistant in it.

The Versa 2 already has Alexa – and will almost certainly now get an option for Google Assistant as well.

Who’s to say that’s not to come?

Also, what do we need cutting edge processors in a wearable for, anyway? I’ve used Fitbit and Garmin devices that do everything I need them to do with great battery life. What am I missing?

Google could be spending billions on their new chips and we may not have heard about it.

I mean, it’s not like they do not make their own chips!

My co-worker’s response to this acquisition this morning:

Goodbye Fitbit. How can I stop Google from getting all my data from the last 7 years?

That’s the sentiment among many Fitbit users today. I’m not a Fitbit user, but if I was I would be pissed right now.

Ask Fitbit not to monetize our data to begin with (they were), or create a time machine and live like a hermit.

Tried Android Wear and Android Watches, for several generations. Did not like the battery life, which most didn’t, but I preferred the health focus over the "mobile device" on your wrist focus.

I already see a lot of ads by Google.

I’m not sure how them acquiring Fitbit will change that?

It’s why I’ll probably buy another Garmin at this point

Will certainly be integrated, since they are already doing fitbit pay

Wear OS was never really focused on fitness though. More of a ‘notifications on your wrist’ and fashion focus.

I’m sure one of the 9 people that have a WearOS device will reply.

The Garmin products are amazing.

Yeah, I bought a Forerunner 245 this year and love it. I wonder if Garmin/Polar/etc. just continue to move further into sports tracking, of if they try to compete in the center with Apple/Google.

I don’t even understand how you can compare apple and google in the same breath as actual sport watches from garmin.

Apple and google can do whatever – but until they can match the level of accuracy in health meta and battery life as long as 3 weeks from one charge – appel and google are just toys.

Apple and google can do whatever – but until they can match the level of accuracy in health meta and battery life as long as 3 weeks from one charge – appel and google are just toys.

Honestly, wouldn’t the ‘toy’ be the one you wear for specific activities a couple days a week, rather than the one you wear for everything else?