Stadia’s product positioning is such a disappointment

Stadia is really interesting and really disappointing from a product perspective. I've been playing around with it on a free trial, and the performance is really great for K. Very little input lag. It all works really well. I get it. They have data centers in Seattle. It's not crazy. Sorry, I think Kirkland. Anyway, the fact that it works, like, do you think about it a little bit? They could pitch this as the next generation of gaming, right? They could pitch this as it's an infinitely powerful game console, more powerful than the PS5, more powerful than a whole box full of PS5s, more powerful than, like, a truckload of Xbox ones that you can't get because they're out of stock everywhere. Instantly available and free to use, but they don't. They're currently marketing this as take the existing items that you own and repurpose them for gaming, which is kind of crazy. It's kind of disappointing from a product perspective, because they're not really highlighting any of the value or benefits of the product. They're just kind of like, "Oh, yeah, we're going to make our own game pass. We're going to make our own GeForce Now." I guess from that perspective, the marketing problem and the positioning problem isn't just stadia. All three of these services have that sort of positioning issue, although you could argue Microsoft is not about to undercut sales of the Xbox, and Nvidia stands to gain from when you call it. They stand to gain, basically, from creating, like, selling hardware, hardware sales. So that makes sense. I'm looking up right now in Cognito. Here's their exact copy on their homepage. You have what it takes. Stadia turns the things you already own into portals to the biggest games. Try Stadia Pro free for one month, 9.99 a month after trial cancel any time. So where's the value here? This isn't telling me that I can play games like, "Oh, what is that game?" Like, I can play Cyverpunk at higher quality settings on St adia than I can on any computer I own. Then I can on, I don't know, play PS5, PS4, Xbox One, but it's not telling me that. It's telling me. Oh yeah, you got a TV, we'll send you a Chromecast, and you can play games on it, like, this is such a waste. The other thing is it's creating confusion in that the entire page neglects to mention that they have a free tier, and that you can use Stadia without paying a monthly fee. And you can use Stadia without buying additional hardware. Now, it's crazy. I guess the last thing that occurred to me is this would be such a cash cow of a business too. If you think about the business model of like console hardware vendors, they lose money on every unit of hardware they sell. Again, a market share, and then they recoup 30, 40% fees for every title sold produced by a third party. The same model could be adopted if Google treated Stadia as a console. If they control the marketplace, they already do. If they can get third parties to put games on it, which, I mean, it's a PC game. It runs in the cloud, like I assume it's dead simple to export a game from Unity. They probably make you build it for limits or something. They're not paying Windows license and fees, but anyway, it 's probably very easy to develop a game for Stadia. Compared to, I don't know, PS5 DevKit, something like that. They could give this away. Let you use whatever controller you want with whatever hardware you want. Similar to how game path ultimate works and make more money off of software sales, then this 995 a month per pro user. It's just ridiculous that pricing model. I guess that's where that leads me is game pass ultimate, because the Xbox One killer. If Microsoft decides they can't really compete with Xbox's, they don't have a TV stick though. They do a partnership with Apple maybe, something like that . It's a game pass ultimate on an Apple TV. That would probably be a very performant, a very smooth experience. Then you go after Google TV, Fire Stick. Yeah, it seems like this is Microsoft's game to win. They just have to sacrifice. Google is the only one who is earning new market share. Anybody else who is competing for market share? Nvidia is not selling any titles when they get a GeForce Now subscriber. They have to make the unit economics of ours spent on a server. They have to make that work that may never work out to be positive for cutting edge in video hardware. They have to stand up data centers. It's not really a great business. Microsoft could shift sales from Steam to their own store. Microsoft is what it is. The Xbox store, I don't know our game center, something like that. They could capture a larger portion of the PC game sales. They're currently happening on Steam and Epic and other platforms. Google has such a massive opportunity and it's being positioned so horribly. Oh, this is painful. Anyway, this isn't me posting an audio log because I haven 't posted in a while. Cheers.