If you’re into ads and want to know more about the future of mobile ads in particular, then I recommend that you attend the Future Technologies conference at Oxford University. Jonathan MacDonald from Blyk will be giving a talk titled ‘User-generated Mobile Advertising.’
Blyk’s innovative business model of minutes and texts in return for engaging with ads is one to be watched closely. I expect that they will continue to innovate in this space. As an MVNO, they have a high degree of control over the user experience and billing relationship, so they are in a prime position to engage users.
There is an increased interest in mobile advertising from various ad agencies and gurus, although for the most part it seems more of a “land grab” for what might seem a relatively ad-free space compared with other already crowded channels. Companies like Blyk are actually at the forefront of defining what mobile advertising is and could be.
Whilst working for Motorola as their Chief Applications Architect, I had the opportunity to be the lead architect for another youth-oriented MVNO with a similar proposition. Though not entirely ad-funded, the major theme was still user engagement, which heavily involved exploiting the potentials of social networking around mobile, which is one of the strong attributes of the mobile experience. With that particular company, the devices were provided to the users (not just SIMs) and so it was possible to have a stronger influence over the user experience. The idea was to never be more than 1-click away from engaging with a friend. There were myriad ways to do this, thus providing an ideal ecosystem for “adding value” to other users, which might include passing of ad-sponsored messages, though not always in an obvious way.
Mobile users are totally familiar with two-way messaging - it is an integral part of the mobile experience, which is why Blyk has focussed on this mode of engaging users with ads. This tends to suggest that mobile advertising can exploit engagement (two-way or multi-way conversations) from the get go. There are lots of exciting possibilities for mobile advertising. Suggested reading is Tomi Ahonen’s recent post on the topic.
Technorati Tags: Blyk, Mobile Advertising
2 responses so far ↓
1 jmac // Mar 26, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Thanks for posting Paul.
The concept of User Generated Advertising I will be talking about will examine the ‘controlling influence’ part that digitally linked communities play in the landscape of marketing.
Within these observations though, it is indeed interesting and vital for the development of commercial communication (in general) to focus on engagement and conversation - regardless of format.
Luckily, mobile is the primary device for engagement and conversation in everyday life so the future looks likely to include mobile in terms of commercial communication. It also is one of the viable solutions to tanking subscriber revenues that networks are seeing.
The things that I personally find so exciting about mobile commercial communication are mainly around application of the most common uses of mobile devices. The 2 primary killer apps on phones are Text and Voice. People use phones to create and maintain contact with others - building relationships. By the way, the 3rd killer app is the Alarm Clock(!)
Sure - the devices are becoming richer and more powerful tools of gadgetry and whilst the usage of genius applications and services will grow and grow, the media market must not be distracted by ‘bells and whistles’ and focus. I say this advisedly as I actively blog on such nerdy stuff at http://www.jonathanmacdonald.com.
The main thing is to keep the main thing, the main thing.
If a brand would actually like to engage people in a conversation about its new product design and encourage people to buy said product, then placing barriers in the way such as cost, clicks, navigation and download time would be the antithesis of effectiveness. After-all, what are the current, primary means for you and your friends to discuss/arrange something?
Think about it - you already know what band your friend adores prior to texting her with the news you have a spare ticket to the gig for £20. She texts back and the deal is done.
How do you know this information? Because you and your friend have discussed what your mutual likes and dislikes are. How did you know that she would probably be willing & able to pay for the spare ticket? Because she had told you that she wanted a ticket and she was willing to pay for it.
Validated demand = incredible chance of success.
If commercial communication was like the above example, people wouldn’t see it as ‘advertising’, they would see it as linking them up with stuff they are into.
This is what I call ‘The Communication Ideal’. Users generate the advertising - either by creation or permission.
Advertisers are ultimately at the mercy of the users who can authorise if/how/when they are monetised and in addition, communicate to advertisers exactly how they would like to be communicated with.
Its an exciting time..
2 Paul G // Mar 29, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Hi Jmac
“The main thing is to keep the main thing, the main thing.”
That’s got to be one of the coolest epigrams going!
I would truly love to brainstorm with you and others about your “Communication Ideal” and ways that it might be achieved.
Are we talking about a new type of open source here? Open advertising? Might collaborators come together to build their own advertising schemes and let others join? Conceptually it might work. Companies can spend millions with ad agencies or share that same money out to the community and possibly get better results.
I guess the problem that I heard during a panel on mobile advertising, is that in order to pay people for bringing attention to a brand or product, there needs to a “unit of attention” that is measurable, like we have CPM and pay-per-click on the web.
Leave a Comment