Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Alexa, how did Amazon’s voice assistant rack up a $10bn loss?

edited November 2022 in Other Investing
The tech giant’s flawed business model for its popular smart devices has cost the company a fortune and thousands of jobs

A commentary by John Naughton, in The Guardian

Following are edited excerpts from that commentary:
Intrigued by an Ars Technica post about Amazon’s Alexa that suggested all was not well in the tech company’s division that looks after its smart home devices, I went rooting in a drawer where the Echo Dot I bought years ago had been gathering dust. Having found it, and set it up to join the upgraded wifi network that hadn’t existed when I first got it, I asked it a question: “Alexa, why are you such a loss-maker?” To which she calmly replied: “This might answer your question: mustard gas, also known as Lost, is manufactured by the United States.” At which point, I solemnly thanked her, pulled the power cable and returned her to the drawer, where she will continue to gather dust until I can think of an ecologically responsible way of recycling her.

Initially, it looked like a shrewd beachhead for the invasion of our homes. Alexa became a kind of hub for other IoT (internet of things) gizmos – lights, thermostats, heaters, doorbells and so on. Clearly, other tech giants also thought it was significant – Apple, Google and Facebook raced to get their home hubs over our thresholds. And people seemed to like using Alexa: children loved conning her into saying stupid things, while their elders used her to set timers for cooking, compiling shopping lists, playing music, requesting definitions of words or information from Wikipedia and so on. But since it was of no real use to me, I switched it off and put it away, assuming that Amazon’s big bet had really paid off.

How wrong can you be? “Amazon Alexa is a ‘colossal failure’,” ran Ars Technica’s headline, “on pace to lose $10bn this year.” It was picking up on a long piece by Business Insider reporting that during the first quarter of this year Amazon’s worldwide digital unit, which includes everything from the Echo smart speakers and Alexa voice technology to the Prime Video streaming service, had an operating loss of more than $3bn, the “vast majority” of which was accounted for by Alexa and related devices and was the largest among all of Amazon’s business units.

So what went wrong? Basically, the business model underpinning Alexa failed to deliver. The company thought that the Echo device (which apparently was sold at cost) would lead people to buy more stuff on Amazon. And when more than 5m of the devices were sold in its first two years, that must have looked like a plausible idea, especially when it transpired Alexa was getting a billion interactions a week!

Sadly, it seems that most of those “conversations” with the device were rather like mine had been: trivial and inconsequential. And, as time went on, the “smart assistants” offered by the other tech giants muscled in on the market. Alexa, with 71.6 million users, now occupies third place but even the thought that the other two are also losing money on their gizmos will not provide much consolation for the Alexa team as its unit is slimmed down.

Amazon, which went on a hiring spree during the pandemic, is now, like all the big tech outfits, shedding jobs on an industrial scale; beginning this month, it plans to lay off 10,000 workers, quite a few of whom will probably be in its hardware division. So maybe the industry is about to discover that invasions – of homes as well as countries – don’t always work out as well as you hoped.

Comments

  • The scale of the loss and miscalculation of the use case is staggering.
  • edited November 2022
    I think it's fair to say that like so much else in life, much of "Tech" is coming to be recognized as "fad". There's surely been uncounted fads in my lifetime, some of very short duration, others of a much longer cycle. Stuff comes, and goes. Hot, then not.

    Because the general concept of "tech" is so widespread, covering so many disparate areas, it seems to be somewhat self-supporting... maybe like a rainforest, where a certain critical mass is required, and once you start eating away at that mass the whole thing becomes increasingly unstable.

    If that's conceptually true, then we might well be seeing a situation where certain pillars of modern technology are falling from previously unnoticed rot. Alexa and similar, some "social" networking, general privacy intrusion, the "metaverse", and of course "crypto" seem to be coming under increasingly negative scrutiny.

    As long as there was the lure of these things as a new road to fabulous riches, various elements of our capitalist system were enthusiastically throwing money in that direction. Now, not so much, and the weakest of the so-called "tech" is being exposed for what it really is. Sometimes reality takes a while to be recognized.
  • Well, at least Amazon didn't name their "smart assistant" Edsel !
  • Now that was indeed a short-lived fad.
  • edited November 2022
    Here's an article posted in the Off-Topic section which is very relevant to this discussion: Tech’s existential threat to humanity
  • edited November 2022
    Yes, I found Alexa to be rather useless, except as a timer, when boiling eggs. Or "she" would chime-in, unwanted and unannounced, when "she" happened to overhear a "hot" word in the HUMAN conversation. ("Shut the f*** up, Alexa!"
    ORK! I forgot: you must ALERT her by using her name before the command.) For a while, she played musical requests, then offered only a preview. Oops, gotta PAY for that. Are you interested? NO!

    "Shut the f*** up, Donny!"
  • One of many reasons why I never got an Alexa is that it overhears your conversations, and then you start getting ads for things you mention to your family. This is just creepy and invasive. It’s like having an advertising spy in your house. Sure, Google already does this with your search history, but tracking your conversations is taking it too far, IMHO.
  • edited November 2022
    Overhear voice and resultant ads is pretty common with Samsung Galaxy S phones and likely amongst other Android phones too.
  • Tarwheel said:

    One of many reasons why I never got an Alexa is that it overhears your conversations, and then you start getting ads for things you mention to your family. This is just creepy and invasive. It’s like having an advertising spy in your house. Sure, Google already does this with your search history, but tracking your conversations is taking it too far, IMHO.

    Agree totally. Why is this crap not prohibited?????????
  • Because Big Tech has bought out DC. Same as oil, defense and corn.
  • stayCalm said:

    Because Big Tech has bought out DC. Same as oil, defense and corn.

    +1.
    ....But of course, we ALL know that. "Regulatory capture."

  • ... as in "Regulatory Corruption".
  • The term lobbying always amuses me -- because the rest of the world calls it and sees it for what it is. More appropriate descriptions would be bribery and greasing the palms.

    But the USA is also the land of the corporation being a person with same rights. So say the smartest justices this land has been blessed with -- Alito, Thomas and Scalia.
  • edited November 2022
    "the USA is also the land of the corporation being a person with same rights"

    I dunno... those "corporation persons" seem to have a lot of better rights than the rest of us.
  • Boneheads. Along with Roberts.
  • By no means "boneheads". Bought and paid-for, though, along with Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. Roberts? Not so much... he does sometimes try to moderate the right-wing fanatics, but hasn't had much luck with that.
  • edited November 2022
    I only use Amazon Echos for streaming SXM music. I'd use Apple Homepods, but they require you to stream SXM from the phone TO the homepod, which kinda defeats the purpose of a voice assistant / onboard capabilities in my view. (I just started dabbling with using Echos to control ambiance lighting, which is kind of fun.)

    Pro Tip: change your Amazon wake-word to 'ziggy' ... it's the least-likely one that'll get triggered accidentally by others or TV commercials.

    PS: I get no tailored ads due to my Echo use. But then again, I'm a securitygeek and do a lot of custom privacy stuff on my networks/devices anyway.
  • The inclusion of privacy and security issues in this thread warrants notice of this:

    Meta fined €265m over data protection breach that hit more than 500m users-
    Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp have been fined nearly €1bn by EU since September 2021


    Following are edited excerpts from this report in The Guardian:
    Facebook’s owner (aka: Mark Zuckerberg) has been fined €265m by the Irish data watchdog after a breach that resulted in the details of more than 500 million users being published online.

    The Data Protection Commission (DPC) said Meta had infringed the EU’s data protection laws after details of Facebook users from around the world were scraped from public profiles in 2018 and 2019.

    The data appeared on a hacking website last year, prompting an investigation by the DPC, which is responsible for regulating Meta across the EU. The watchdog said a “significant” number of the users were from the EU.

    In addition to the fine, it “imposed a reprimand and an order” requiring Meta to “bring its processing into compliance by taking a range of specified remedial actions within a particular timeframe”.

    In a statement Meta said: “We made changes to our systems during the time in question, including removing the ability to scrape our features in this way using phone numbers. Unauthorised data scraping is unacceptable and against our rules.”

    The punishment brings the total amount of fines imposed on Meta by the DPC to nearly €1bn since September last year. In September Meta was fined €405m for letting teenagers set up Instagram accounts that publicly displayed their phone numbers and email addresses, while in March the watchdog fined Meta €17m for further GDPR breaches and in September last year it fined Meta’s WhatsApp €225m over “severe” and “serious” infringements of GDPR.

    However, one legal expert questioned whether strong enforcement of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation would have the deterrent effect that it intended.

    “By any measure, these are significant fines,” said David Hackett, head of data protection in the Ireland office of law firm Addleshaw Goddard. “GDPR envisaged the imposition of such fines in part to serve as a deterrent to other companies which might consider breaching the law. We are likely to see increased debate about whether such fines actually influence corporate behaviour or if some companies simply see them as an added cost of doing business.

    The DPC regulates Apple, Google, TikTok and other technology platforms owing to the location of their EU headquarters in Ireland. It currently has 40 inquiries open into such companies, including 13 involving Meta.
    Note: Textual emphasis was added



  • edited November 2022
    This is a cost of business for FB, same as stretching the regulatory envelope and paying fines is for Uber.

    This behavior is an enterprise version of risk taking behavior amongst CEO's who take big strategic gambles with huge diamond parachute payoffs if things work out but even if things go south still have a comfortable silver parachute. Meanwhile in a silver parachute scenario investors and employees are hosed. Heads I win, tails you lose.
  • Thanks for the news, OJ. stayCalm, you are on target.
  • edited November 2022
    Cash fines for tech firms that are cash gushers is the equivalent of fining somebody 1 bottle of water after they broke in and raided all of the drinks and snacks from the break room vending machine. It is a flick on the wrist. A threat of booting them out of the market would focus the mind.

    This is entirely anecdotal but I have personal experience working in a Top 3 bank in the US where one aspect of ranking the priority of compliance projects was the size of the regulatory fine.

    Once you remove jail time from the worst case penalty, all kinds of malbehavior occurs. To cite a real life example, several execs from Countrywide Financial were fined by the SEC for the toxic trash loans originated by Countrywide but the vast majority of the actual fines were paid by insurance firms and not by the culprits. The execs collectively parachuted out with more than $1B, were collectively fined less than $100M and paid less than $10M out of pocket. Heads I win, tails you lose. Staff and investors got pennies to the dollar.
Sign In or Register to comment.