Google forks out $2.1bn for Fitbit – and promises not to exploit all that delicious health data to sling ads (honest) Google will pay $2.1bn to acquire Fitbit, the second largest company in the wearables market, inserting itself into a world increasingly dominated by Apple – and continuing the mass consolidation of consumer technology by the Big Three corporations; Amazon being the third party. Offering $7.35 a share, Google was prepared to …
When Fitbit bought Pebble, I kept an eye on their smartwatches, hoping that they'd produce something like the Pebble. That never happened, so I never bought any of their gear.
Now, I'm SO happy about that, as I would be pretty angry at Google getting their hands on whatever data Fitbit collected.
Fitbit just launched a subscriber service with a 1 month trial period. Could the extra valuation be based on subscribers and expected revenue? The new sleep insights which show how much you toss and turn at night might also be of use to google (or should i say security services) should you be alone or with another Android user.
That's an astute observation, I think. My son has a FitBit and used it to track his (disturbed) sleep patterns - you can access a nice little graph of depth of sleep through the night at a fairly granular level.
A couple of months ago, he came and told me the detailed sleep observations were now paywalled behind their "premium" subscriber service. I thought this was greedy and bonkers, as who would pay Fitbit a substantial monthly fee just to access their own data.
But yes, using it to plump up their valuation prior to the buyout seem like a much more likely scenario.
To fair they haven't pay walled anything, just added new sleep insights you previous couldn't see such as sleeping heart rate and motion, you still get sleep states and a sleep score. I did complain as I thought it wasn't on that a premium price tracker wanted a subscription for features advertised with the device, I might as well have bought a cheap one in that case. I appreciate the other features such as personal training plans and videos etc.. are cost options because I was never told I would be getting them. Needless to say they didn't care so next fitness tracker won't be a fitbit.
Because the love of my life is Type 1 I tend to get spammed by all of the shysters on Instagram, Twiiter etc. peddling their disgusting snakeoil cures for diabetes. Nowadays they seem to know when we have to do glucose checks and tend to hit my email right on cue.
Yes there are WiFi connected pace makers! My brother has one (it's a combined pace maker/defibrillator). It picks up WiFi to upload data. During my brother's convalescence, he used to take a walk each day to his local Costa Coffee and his consultant could see the connection details and location in the data uploaded. He did also get a couple of calls checking up on him after some worrying data got uploaded as he was being closely monitored for months after installation.
Downside is the WiFi use halves the lifetime of the battery so, now he's largely recovered, that feature has been switched off and the data are downloaded when he goes for a checkup.
wifi (dis)connected pacemakers wouldn't be too profitable, as a one-off (unless it's on a rent-to-kill basis). The purpose is to milk the "user" for as long as they can afford it. A "disconnect" feature would come as a premium service, i.e. if you can afford this last payment. Otherwise, default is life support - free of charge FOR EVER, in exchange for access to your data, we need your dna in place of signature, a drop of blood will do, sounds like a good deal, eh?
No, they have already done dodgy deals with UK Health trusts.
However no way should anyone anywhere approve this. This serves three purposes:
1) Yet another buy in instead of development. Android was bought in and very successful for phones and tablets. Garbage on TVs and a disaster on wearables. Android & Chrome & ChromeOS replace the street view war-driving.
2) Gather even more personal data.
3) Compete with Apple in Apple's last niche, which having got off to a poor start the Apple Watch is inexplicably doing well.
Thus Google buying Fitbit was inevitable given failure of Android wearables/watch and growth of Apple smart watch. Also the Apple Watch has been adding health features.
This is not about hardware, it's about another piece in the IoT jigsaw picture: health, exercise activity, location habits. The walls are closing in. Your FitBit flashes a text...
"Quite a good run this morning, Joe. Ready for a thirst quencher, only 50 m along the street at Pep-Juice. Special today for successful 5km joggers."
I remember back in the day when Symantec was buying up every product we had bought when it was independent and getting very depressed. Now it is Google buying everything just to get the data, quite depressing. I can only hope they go the same way as Symantec and all those other acquisition hungry companies that don't actually know how to run the companies they buy and where just after the assets.
Unfortunately I fear they are more Skynet than Symantec.
...has always been the Board trying to run the company and micro-manage the executives. Looks like that issue is finally being solved by Broadcom. Careful where you sling the mud as the people in the trenches always knew what the problems & and solutions were, they were just not empowered to fix them.
Now where have we heard that before only to find out that it that we were dreaming and... {you fill in the blanks}
Just got back from the Gym and several people there have already decided to ditch their FitBits. They were all talking about getting an Apple Watch which is not what Google wants.
Like me they don't want Google to get their hands on their health data although it might be too late for many.
I just have to wonder how long it will be before Google decide to 'discontinue the service'? Like many other things that Google have tried this is very niche and may well flop once they get their hands on it. Most big companies love to mess with things that worked very well before. Look what MS did to Skype...
I was standing behind three people in a shopping centre a few days ago. They were comparing their step numbers for the day with some satisfaction. They were all severely obese.
I remain to be convinced that any of this fitness technology has any more effect than tying a chocolate eclair just out of reach at the end of the treadmill.
So your whole view on the fitness / wearables industry is based on seeing a couple of fat people discussing step count? Have you tried going to watch a few marathons, a swim meet, or a 10k run perhaps? How about a Parkrun or a middle or sprint distance Triathlon? I think you'd find that the sheer volume of people out there using these devices to successfully help track their performances and ongoing fitness would destroy your somewhat blinkered viewpoint instantly.
Personally I wouldn't have either an Apple or Fitbit watch as neither IMHO are really fit for purpose; but Garmin in my opinion still produce the best sports watches and I'd rate my 935xt far higher than either of the former.
This post has been deleted by its author
I was wondering about this. The name "Fitbit" defines the niche they're in. Good for Google to grab more user data, but really it's a product aimed at a specific market. i.e. the ones that want to measure their heart rates while they drive to the gym. (Sorry cynical comment, but you know what I mean).
And that market is of a defined size. And surely most of them probably already have a Fitbit. So it's a replacements market.
"Just got back from the Gym and several people there have already decided to ditch their FitBits. They were all talking about getting an Apple Watch which is not what Google wants."
Is an Apple watch really any better for privacy? You are leaving Fitbit for fear of Google getting more of your data, and handing that data to another company (Apple) instead.
I figure Google already has my email and I already have an Android, but Apple has nothing yet. Why would I want to give another of the big 3 my data?
"Similar to our other products, with wearables, we will be transparent about the data we collect and why. We will never sell personal information to anyone"
And then this from the same elReg feed mind...
"I understand your desire for transparency," the letter continued, before refusing to release the report because it is a staff report and they are "deliberative, pre-decisional, and an integral part of the FTC's decision-making process,” and hence outside the scope of FOIA...
The above from a US trade commission to a US senator request on googles anti-competitive behavior
Also tldnr... Because on balance of previous evidence its probably a lie
This post has been deleted by its author
I'm not generally one for great sarcasm (well, okay, only when warranted) but did anybody else Laugh Out Loud for real when reading Google's statements about how they value customers, sorry, products, and their data?
Don't know how anybody can say those things with a straight face at Google.
Oh, and my health insurance just happens to want to know what I'm going to do about my recent blood results and are offering cheaper funerals.
Stethoscope's in the other pocket.
Let's face it. There's simply too much interest in everyone wanting to know about everyone else. It's basic human nature. Look at China and so on. Pretty soon we'll either submit to Big Brother or get marginalized, outcast...or culled. Sheer numbers will prevent a serious pushback, especially given how many have been betrayed st least once.
Its the mark of the beast as prophesied in the book of revelation, that until you have a google/apple/amazon smart watch , you shall not be allowed to buy/sell stuff via their websites which shall soon become the only way you'll be able to buy/sell stuff.
And thus the devil will know everything you've done, everywhere you've been and there'll be no hiding place for the poor sinners of this world.....
Forget the anonymization. They'll just sell it in the clear to the highest bidder, given they wouldn't be buying it if it can't be nailed down to the individual in the first place. Plus, enough aggregate information is impossible to anonymize, as any datum can narrow down the suspects.
Dear Valued customer,
We regret to inform you that due to recent changes in the market (We purchased full data assets from google, aka fitbit, amazon and other companies that are willing to sell their data for a quick dollar), we are cancelling your health insurance policy
" They don't however include other sports so if you cycle five hours a day then it doesn't register it..." Have you considered that this is due to the fact that as an insurer, they know about the way drivers tend to drive around cyclists, and therefore see it as an an increased risk of one of their other policy holders having a claim against them when they hit a cyclist who "suddenly appeared from nowhere" (but I wasn't looking at my phone, or "Couldn't see for the low sun" (yet continued to drive at full speed), and of the course the old SMIDLSCSY (Sorry mate I Didn't Look So Couldn't See You)
“Similar to our other products, with wearables, we will be transparent about the data we collect and why. We will never sell personal information to anyone. Fitbit health and wellness data will not be used for Google ads. And we will give Fitbit users the choice to review, move, or delete their data.”
What a muppet this dude is ... Who really believe this non-sense ?
Obviously Googlies have only one aim with this - to grab even more data from users.
I think the blame is with government though - just make harvesting this data for uses other than EXPLICITLY (ie - opt-in) stated by the user, illegal. Instead, we have endless enquiries that take so many years to complete that by the time they do finish, everyone has forgotten what the issue was, and today's issue is massively more important anyway. I simply cannot understand why no legislation has been passed on this. We have GDPR but let's face it, it sounds good on paper, but how much has actually changed? I think the biggest effect has been the death of whois. And that's about it.
I know that companies like Google and Facebook make big money from targeted advertising based on slurping user data but has anyone actually checked to see if any of this advertising works? I get annoyed by popups and unwanted advertising and this habit of taking over substantial amounts of screen real-estate to serve up meaningless advertisements, but its chiefly because of its impact on the performance of my systems. I rarely go "Wow", I must buy that power inverter or get 'smarter security' ". (BTW -- ElReg -- this must qualify as one of the most inane advertising campaigns I've ever come across.) Its an unfortunate fact of life that marketing people live in a world of their own, often totally disconnected from reality, and people in that world thrive by convincing other people in same world of the value of their contributions. Its a self-promoting vortex that leaves people like myself cold. It also chews up vast amounts of corporate revenue.
Instead of pausing and thinking about this corporations seem to have just doubled down. I've already had products that track steps and heart rate -- they've been around for a decade or more -- and the ones that require interacting with a corporate website rapidly fell into disuse. Its wasn't just the 'spying', its the inconvenience, the unnecessary bloat that's sold as 'enhancing the consumer experience' (tip -- it isn't). This is the reason why I've shown little to no interest in IoT -- its not that I don't understand the value of interconnecting 'things', I've been doing it as part of my job for decades, its just the technobloat not only makes things unwieldy, it makes them unreliable and potentially unsafe. So I'll collect my personal health information but its not sprayed all over the Internet, its shared with my provider and then only as a 'need to know'. But as I've learned from my work arguing common sense -- or ethics -- with marketing people is just a waste of time so expecting any kind of change is pointless, not even 'natural selection' makes a dent in their believe system.
No. Nobody has ever checked if spending £millions and £billions is worthwhile. All these companies trying to manage a razor-thin profit margin have never attempted to measure if there are benefits or ROI for their advertising spend. Bean-counters querying how many pencils an employee can reasonably use in a year or how to shave 1p per employee from toilet paper usage are happy to accept massive advertising bills without caring if it achieves anything.
(OK, I know the answer, but if I weren't a dismal cynic awaiting the end-times...)
There's no technical need to post all this data off to the internet. The watch could store all the data locally until it gets back into the range of a trusted device and those trusted devices could do all the processing and data storage that you need, talking to each other over the owner's domestic Wi-Fi. The hardware is a data logger. The software isn't much more complicated than load of numbers stored in a git repository, with a browser front end running on top of a load of Python.
Is there just no market for products that don't plunder your privates to enrich the nearest unscrupulous bastard?
Agreed, but not enough people seem to care. I bought an OMRON blood pressure monitor - offering graphing functions. When I got it, it became clear the functions were only on their site. why would they not let me export a .csv ? I can guess. Returned it, but I feel people on this forum do not represent the wider population who many, happily have a voice activated "friend" in their homes ....
"There's no technical need to post all this data off to the internet."
You're only saying that because you clearly aren't an athlete who uses such a device. There are loads of services provided by the Fitbit website that combine data from the indvidual devices to do route planning, track training and interact with other athetes. Data logging and aggregation is only one piece of the picture.
"When you use our products, you’re trusting Google with your information"
No, Google, I bought a Fitbit product, not a Google product. I did NOT choose to trust Google with my information.
I already walked away from Whatsapp after their acquisition by Facebook and the subsequent syphoning of Whatsapp's data by Facebook. In this case its a lot harder because I can't just find another provider for the Fitbit device that I own.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
