April 2007 - Investigation into consumer reaction to advertising on mobile phones

 

Whispers about the secret development of a Google mobile phone have been circulating in the UK for the last 18 months, but recent media reports suggest that the project may be nearing launch with the cost to the user heavily subsidised (or completely covered?) by advertising.

 

Enabling increased access to the mobile web is entirely logical – given that the company was quick to recognise that, as they put it “you don’t need to be at your desk to need an answer”. 

 

But how popular would a reduction in mobile phone bills be if the trade off is consenting to receive advertising?

 

Research suggests that consumers would react positively to mobile advertising as long these acid tests are met:

 

“What’s in it for me?”

“As long as I call the shots…”

“I’ll tell you what I want”

 

 

“What’s in it for me?”

Consumers will not give consent to receive advertising – but consent can be exchanged for reward

• “I will tolerate advertising on my phone and even watch some ads, if you give me something of value in exchange.” (1)
• Almost half of the 16-25 year olds would be happy to receive ads in exchange for free content (2)
• 32% of British consumers outside this age bracket would be happy to receive marketing text messages, videos and pictures on their mobile phones in exchange for free content (2)
• 42% of UK adults would accept up to 12 adverts delivered to their mobile per week in exchange for free mobile content (2)

As a result, networks all over the world are adopting some form of “paid viewing” model, by which people are compensated for viewing ads. For instance, MoviDirect in Mexico provides free airtime to subscribers who submit a brief profile and agree to receive text messages on products, services, and promotions (1)

 

“As long as I call the shots…”

 

The consumer will accept advertising by invitation only

• “I’ll endure advertising on my phone if I have some degree of control, such as the ability to opt in or out.” (1)
• Targeted mobile advertising is 50 percent more acceptable to mobile internet users than untargeted ads. (3)
• 58 percent prefer banner ads on mobile internet pages to mobile marketing text messages that they have not opted into (3)

 Advertising based on an old media interrupt model is unacceptable

• Receptiveness varies according to the time of the day the message was received (2)
  • The most popular time of day to receive messages was the evening (15.5%).
  • Least popular was during the working day (6.3%).
• Consumers are concerned over the quantity and cost of messages (2)
  • 38% of consumers are worried about being bombarded by advertising messages
  • 33% are worried that they would be charged and find themselves unable to unsubscribe from the service.

 “I’ll tell you what I want”

 

Consumers would be prepared to divulge personal information and preferences as long as this data is used to improve the relevance of advertising delivered.

N.B. What is relevant should be defined by the recipient, (not by the advertiser).

• “I will accept advertising on my phone if it’s relevant and interesting to me” (1)
• 78 percent would be happy to receive mobile advertising tailored to their interests (3)
• Of those, 64 percent would be willing to provide personal details to be analyzed to improve relevance of targeted ads (3) 
• 42 percent would be more likely to buy more mobile content if they received personalized recommendations (3)

Advertising on such a personal device remains an emotive issue.

• People do not want their personal space to be violated by unwelcome messages, nor do they want to share their mobile screen without some form of incentive or reward” (1)
• “Therefore, unsolicited and irrelevant advertising will be even less welcome than e-mail spam” (1)
• “Push is really inappropriate in a personal device. Even with a double opt-in” (4)
• “What happens is that when people opt in to do stuff, it maybe satisfies a legal requirement, but I’m not sure it meets the test that treats the consumer with velvet gloves” (4)

 

"The perfect search engine," says Google co-founder Larry Page, "would understand exactly what you mean and give back exactly what you want."

 

Now if they could apply that approach to the mobile web advertising I receive and pay my phone bill….

 

 

(1) Millward Brown’ POV August 2006

(2) Pitch Mobile Marketing August 2006

(3) Enpocket -The Consumer Mobile Advertising report October 2006

(4) Rhythm New Media November 2006