There's a marketing executive quoted in this story on mobile marketing who says delivering ads
to cell phones may be the "silver bullet" the industry has been looking for, especially in light of decreasing
TV ad effectiveness. BZZZZZZ, I'm sorry that's the wrong answer but thanks for playing.
Mobile marketing will be seen as unneccesary and intrusive until at least one of two things happens: First, customers should be able to select, via the service provider, what kinds of ads they wish to receive. Delivering an ad for, say, DVD rentals means nothing if the recipient is a mom who just has enough energy to get through the day before falling asleep shortly after the kids. It's that kind of un-targeted approach that's gotten TV into trouble so replicating the error seems like wrong-headed thinking.
Second, there needs to be some sort of price reduction if ads are going to be part of the package. Cell phones are devices which are purchased for personal use. That's different than TVs or radios, which are designed to be mass entertainment devices. Ads on a cellphone are on the same level as putting an ad on my lawn mower. And people can get TV for free (aside from cable or satellite fees) as long as they understand there's going to be advertising. So if cell phone companies want to bring in additional dollars by selling ad space they need to bring down customer's bills accordingly.
So they need to not only be wary of delivering ads to cell phones and other mobile devices but need to be careful how they do it. Send customers a questionaire to return with their payment that outlines what sorts of advertising they'd be willing to accept and make it clear that this means an X percentage bill reduction for every ad viewed in full.
1. In fairness the two points you make (consumers should only be sent messages if they have given specific permission and should also experience some cost reduction benefit) are both addressed in the NY Times article you link to. Mobiles are immensely personal devices and marketers mess with that relationship at their peril.
However done in a targeted, sympathetic way and with well protected permissions messages can be welcomed by consumers as useful and beneficial. For example a 20% off deal from a shoe shop (when you're out looking for new shoes), or a free beer sample offer as you pass a bar in the evening (and have stated you're a beer drinker open to such offers) may be things we one day wonder how we did without.
Failure to target or ignorance of consumer values would of course lead to a Minority Report-style intrusive SPAM nightmare that no responsible marketer or brand owner would ever want to be part of.
Posted at 9:02AM on Jan 17th 2006 by Nick Gillett