1) 411 – either free or freemium

2) Call tracking, call management – e.g Skydeck

3) Security – a subscription based service around security. Encryption of SMS, email, voice mail etc.

4) Advertising – Google is going to get a large % of the ad revenue from the web pages viewed on Palm devices, because of the Admob deal. Can palm offer advertising on the home screen in a non-intrusive manner?

5) Storage – pictures, video, sms, email

Moto+Palm for another integrated/vertical solution? That position is not available for Motorola. They could try it, but they would fail.

Interesting twist, but…doesn’t Motorola need a Palm more than Palm needs a Motorola?

Hokay, you are smart.Cheer up intelligent human.

You sounds dangerously like Sramana Mitra in this post – throwing out investment recommendations based on consultant-like arguments.

I think the MOT-PALM combination is unlikely on a couple of counts (much like the DELL-PALM, and NOK-PALM combinations that were the major stories of 2009).

1) At $12.5, PALM is priced north of $3b on a fully diluted share count. MOT (the parent company) has $7b of cash on their balance sheet. In 2008, their mobile division accounted for ~$3.5b (of $27b) in assets, $12b revenues and $2b operating losses. It’s unclear to me why they’d essentially double (or triple, according to the speculators who argue for a higher stock price) their outlay on mobile devices to purchase a company that has a track record of wasting money to overpay engineers (it’s telling that the core design comes from the team that bankrupt Helios).

Basically, you’re indicating that MOT, a company that has been focusing on network rollouts (both cable and wireless) should burn most of their their hard earned cash on supporting a failed wireless team.

2) The argument for PALM seems to be based around WebOS and the team. Well, if you consider PALM’s outlay over the past two years – it essentially cost them $400m to develop the software at the team. Even if you attribute some premium to the urgency factor, it’s hard to justify a price tag north of $800m for the whole shebang. It’s understandable that you & Mitra cut your teeth at the end of the 90s, but $3-4b on failing companies isn’t quite the way things are done nowadays.

3) You define WebOS as a success. The only proof of such is company profitability. PALM has been unable to demonstrate this. Jon R. helped develop the iPod and take costs out of the design process. He lacks the sales & marketing support that Jobs and others provided. Somehow, I don’t think MOT is a natural fit to “unlock” the value of PALM’s decent technology, given their marketing blunders.

Basically, the only people who benefit from such commentary are Elevation Partners, Goldman Sachs (by helping with ridiculous financings), and the day traders.

The people who hurt are those who have their money managed by Elevation Partners, Capital World, Fidelity, Blackrock & T Rowe. Gun slinging managers who see PALM as a mini-revival of the late 90s.