Posts Tagged ‘Mobile advertising’

Proximity marketing…is there value?

March 19, 2016

I have been much more active lately posting and sharing on LinkedIn than on this site. I do hate duplicating content, and have not had the opportunity to do both as well as I would like.

I am going to try and work on that. Maybe I could start with a discussion thread on tracking your phone (by beacon or WiFi), as the whole issue of tracking within the store is an interesting one.

sol-proxmobile

I believe (my opinion only) that in the past couple years, consumers have become more accepting of in-store proximity marketing, if for no other reason other than it has become so much better. Understanding the likely reason to be in the store (based on past interaction with that retail brand), and ability to pinpoint specific areas of the store has definitely improved. Retailers are learning what is too much (or too little messaging) and how to gauge time in store, time in a specific area, and progress through the store in sending these messages at more appropriate times.

Yet, this is a practice that is certainly still in transition, and mistakes are still made. How this process is executed may cause consumers to get their backs up. Receiving an offer after just making that purchase is annoying. Many are opposed to the practice of having competitor’s geo-fencing another store and providing competing coupons, while others find this fascinating. Getting bombarded upon entering the store is usually not desirable.

Also, consumers may not recognize that they may have opted to receive messages from the store location itself, but may also simultaneously be receiving ads and messages from other apps that they have on their phones and other sources they have previously opted to have messages from. To say the least, at times the whole process can get messy.

Here are a few data points that all the more underline why proximity marketing may the best way ahead (note: the originator of this material certainly has a vested interest in beacon technology, but interesting still the same):

  • The average clickthrough rate (CTR) for a Facebook ad is 0.119%, according to a recent Wordstream report
  • The average clickthrough rate (CTR) for an email is 1% to 3%, according to a recent report by Mailchimp
  • The average clickthrough rate (CTR) for beacon based push notifications can be as high as 80%, according to the data published by push notification technologist Kahuna (Beaconstac, 2016).

(more on this discussion can be found here: Sheehy, A. (2013, August 19). The Mobile Advertising Value Chain.  http://www.nakono.com/tekcarta/analysis-insight/mobile-advertising/mobile-advertising-value-chain/  )

I do think that one of the big drawbacks to this type of push marketing is that not all consumers have their phones out at all times (I know…it varies by generation, but it still can be a pain to have your phone out in a department store sometimes).  That is why I am encouraged by some of the other ways that proximity marketing can be accomplished such as displaying digital instore signage of items that might be of interest if you have your phone on or through Near Field Communications (NFC) marketing, where you hold your phone close to the sensor to receive more information. Personally, I also like the fact that proximity marketing for that brand ends when you leave the store or certainly shortly thereafter.

What about you…proximity marketing, yea or nay?

Advertisements

Tablets, and Laptops and Phones…Oh My

November 4, 2012

Below I have posted a link for an article about Mojiva Tab, an advertising platform specifically for tablets.

Mojiva Launches a New Tablet Only Advertising Network

The article highlights that the time is right as consumers move away from their laptops and PCs in favor of tablets. I think a fundamental assumption underlying this move is also that tablets are not phones. As I have discussed before, tablets and phones have different capabilities and strengths, and consumers often use them in different settings or at the very least, for different purposes.

Mojiva’s own press release – Mojiva Press Release – posted on their web site indicates that tablet advertising is more effective overall that mobile in general. While I think to some extent this statement is self serving, I also see it as true in a contextual sense. The reality is that there is a time in most consumers’ minds for phone, and there is a time for the tablets. Consumers uses them for different purposes (at least today), and due to size difference, even physically interact with them differently.

There is little doubt that tablets have eroded usage of conventional desktops and laptops. It will be interesting to see to what extent they can encroach on phones, the epitome of a connected, on-th-go lifestyle

Mobile must be all about the customer….

November 27, 2011

As in all marketing efforts, it is important to do your best on all steps of the process, from strategy through planning to execution and measurement. It’s very much like what William Young writes in The Shack  “…if anything matters, then everything matters”. That being said, there is important, and then there is important…

Numerous experts indicate that the most important issue to consider when developing a mobile marketing plan is in knowing where the plan might fail and how to account for that failure. While this is certainly important, as it is one of the natural progressions in building the plan, failure planning is not likely to be effective without a clear view of the customer/prospect and the overall marketing objective being pursued.

So those 2 factors (knowledge of the customer and your objectives) are likely the most critical to making for a successful effort, as all the other important factors stem from them.

From a very practical point of view, mobile (at least today) is direct response; the better we identify the audience for the messaging, the greater the desired response. And like with email, advertising to mobile clients who have not opted in to receiving your message is likely to be met with a scathing response and very negative brand image. Opt-in is important.

However, defining the appropriate audience has to go beyond collecting those who naturally opt in. Finding additional customers becomes a reiterative process where we look at who our ideal customers for the program are, how to best tailor our offering to fill the needs of those customers/prospects and what approach to them will motivate them to grant permission.

This process requires determining what our customers and potential customers want: not just product, but interaction method, timing, information level desired, how they use mobile, etc.  I am not marginalizing the rest of mobile marketing components; they are all important.  However, the audience and their need will determine the message. The message will often determine the media, both in terms of platform and browser, message style and content, frequency, escalation, interplay with other legs of our marketing, etc.

High Noon Shoot Out: Mobile Apps versus Mobile Sites

March 22, 2010

 

Tombstone and the OK Corral, circa 1908, Retrieved from Wikipedia

 

 

 

Every year, we hear that this is the year that mobile commerce will be coming of age. And then that year passes.

While I’m not stating that 2010 will be the year, we are certainly getting closer. However, obstacles remain. One of the issues that marketers are still grappling with is the decision on whether to enter mobile marketing using a specifically designed mobile site or rather, to enter using a mobile application program (mobile app).

This “either or” decision is often based on costs and risk aversion; marketers entering the fray want to do so with limited expenditure, yet in such as way as to not injure the brand they are seeking to promote. For those dipping their toe for the first time, there are distinct advantages inherent in both options.

Advantages of m-sites

The overall biggie: short term flexibility to adjust and more open access generally favor mobile sites.

  • The market can be entered more quickly: Mobile sites can be built to using some technology and content from the parent site. A mobile app requires a higher degree of coding and more development time and cost.
  • Mobile sites are typically entered by a phone containing a browser using the same URL as a company’s traditional site, and redirected to the mobile optimized version. Apps can only be used on the newer generations of smartphones, and only in those instances where the app has been built to coexist with the phone operating system in question.
  • Needed changes can be made on the fly to a mobile site, however, the consumer must be made aware of changes to an app and then go through actions needed to download those changes.

Advantages of apps

On the other hand, mobile apps are not without their advantages. While they can only be installed on the newest generation of smartphone, they use the full computing capabilities of these phones.

  • Integration with other apps available for that phone and operating system.
  • Better, richer graphics with higher resolutions.
  • Apps yield higher performance, more like the expectations that consumers expect from their laptop computers. Because much of the “under the hood” technology resides of the mobile device itself, the app only needs to reach out for specific information such as price.

The ideal solution of course would be for a marketer to support customers making either choice. And many do, recognizing the synergy that can be developed by having both a mobile site and an installed app.

 The largest entry barrier for many potential players is dealing with requirements of writing and maintaining different versions of your message for different operating systems. With either option, this potential incompatibility can be an issue; it is just more pronounced with apps.

This is a real hurdle for companies seeking to go mobile to overcome. For example, looking at the Target site, we can see they have both a m-site and a downloadable app.  However, even a retailer as large as Target is only willing to make a bet on the iPhone at this point. Motorola, Palm and Blackberry users need not apply.

This limitation is one of the reasons that the Mobile Marketing Association (MMA) is striving mightily to establish common base technical standards for mobile. Here’s to hoping they can have some measure of success in this effort.

Then, maybe we won’t have to fight after all. Instead, let’s go have lunch and celebrate the year of the mobile ad at the Capital Saloon.

Mobile Advertising… Love It, BNOMP*

February 20, 2010

As a marketer, mobile advertising is one of those developments that you just have to love. And, in theory, I do. After all, what’s not to love?

Mobile is viewed as being “the world’s first direct mass medium” (Dan Rosen, as quoted in Howard, 2008). Successful mobile campaigns, while relatively easy and inexpensive to implement, require a distinct strategy at the outset to be effective. Mobile campaigns are an IMC dream come true. Setting the stage to get phone subscribers to opt in, grabbing their attention, and then advancing them to action (either by visiting, calling, subscribing or visiting a microsite) is really cool.

Mobile Ad for Lincoln XF

And mobile programs can truly be really value-adds to the consumer. Whether the receiver wants to know what’s available on a local level (think shopping, restaurant or car rental), be kept up to date on latest offerings from a favored company, or download a new ringtone or wall paper, mobile advertising can meet all of these wants.

But while I recognize and admire these benefits, for me at least, this love will go unrequited. Under the best of circumstances, the phone subscriber must agree to opt-in. And therein lies my personal disconnect.

I’m a person who just wants a phone to be a phone (admittedly, I do text upon occasion). While I am not a technology Luddite, if I want info on the go, my laptop is my preference, and for me, does it so much better. While I recognize that in some instances a phone would be more convenient (imagine walking downtown on a hot, sunny day….), those few instances of potential opportunity are not worth receiving messages from McDonald’s, Verizon and even Ford. When my phone goes off, I want it to be a valued friend, family member or business acquaintance at the other end.

I think this is part of driver of netbooks in the market. There are those of us who just want various portions of this digital media world to remain in compartments.

But for those of us who don’t, that is the beauty of mobile marketing.

References:

Howard, T. (2008, June 19). USA lags on cellphones’ marketing potential. USA Today. Retrieved February 12, 2010 from Lexis-Nexis Academic: http://lexis-nexis.com/

Internet Advertising Bureau. (2010). Mobile advertising case studies: Jaguar XF Luxury Sedan. Retrieved February 12, 2010, from http://www.iabuk.net/en/1/mobilecasestudies.html

*But not on my phone