online-ads] Re: The next big thing

From: Kim Brooks <kbrooks_at_bardo-brooks.com>
Date: Tue 06 Feb 2001 15:04:19 -0600

BRANDI JASMINE <brandi_at_brandijasmine.com> WROTE:
> ... The only possible good "ad" idea I have heard so
> far is an opt-in system that helps you find a coffee
> shop, gas station, or bathroom through a WAP portal, or
> pop-up ads that appear on your phone when you are near
> the store you are looking for, telling you where it is.
> But this is not "advertising" in the passive, spoon-fed
> model we're used to. Customers will have to actively
> seek it out. "Advertisers" will have to get creative
> and turn their messages into services before cellular
> customers will embrace them.

Oy, I'm gettin' tired of that example of passing a
Starbucks and getting a coupon for a cheap latte. It's
just not real, and won't be for years if ever. Note
that most commonly-referred-to location-detection is
based on e911 technology. Which is only mandated to
serve areas populated enough to merit the investment
(e.g., very urban). Which is only mandated to work 67%
of the time, even when it is implemented. Which can be
appealed or delayed by cell carriers that can't afford
to implement it. See my skeptical article at
http://clickz.com/article/cz.2752.html or
http://www.xypoint.com/we911/legislation/fccorder2.html
for the full text of the FCC's e911 location detection
requirements. Let me wax irritable on this
location-based advertising hype, which is just about
the only hype that keeps recurring in wireless
conversations since web-based models have proven
dismally useless...

Basically, wireless carriers are carrying a huge cost
-- we're talking BILLIONS -- to update their
infrastructure to meet e911 reqs. The Starbucks Coupon
myth is, in my view, their way of trying to recoup
those costs with some commercial use. It is absolutely
not a) customer-driven; b) realistic; c) acceptable to
most cell users; d) useful to advertisers. So it's an
odd strategy.

I saw a presentation by Viair recently, where their CTO
mentioned "7 out of 10 cell phones in the US are
already web-ready." He mentioned this like it was a
good thing, as if there were a huge market ready to be
switched on. Then he later mentioned something like 1
in 20 web-phones users never access their web features.
Umm, I would intepret all that to mean that the
technology is already widely available, and has been
for a while now, but people just don't use it. It's
too uncomfortable, too tiny, and fairly useless. If
you have the internet at home and at work, how many
people need it on their phone? From the looks of it,
maybe 1 in 20? So 5% of the population that can will
use wireless web. And then only those who live in
urban areas will be location-detectable. And then only
those who have consented to the service will be
contacted. And then it will work only 67% of the time.

So the users are irritated about having their privacy
violated. The advertisers are getting a total market
of um, maybe, 11 users in the whole U.S. for location
pushes. The only people that could love this scheme
must be... the carriers and wireless portals.

> I have to say I shudder at the thought of cell-spam...
> I cannot imagine how frosted I would be to be pushed
> ads on my cell phone - especially since I pay for time.

Exactly, Brandi. I get frosted, too. And you & I (and
others reading this list) are tech-savvy, ad-savvy
marketing geeks. If we get frosted, just imagine how
irritated regular users would be. We get ticked when a
telemarketer calls at dinner time -- picture that same
call (whether a call or a text message) happening
during a romantic dinner, in the middle of a movie, or
gawd forbid, a traffic jam. People just don't want
this. So I'm amazed that so many analysts, marketers,
media buyers, creative agencies, and dot-coms are
putting so much credence behind the idea of wireless
advertsing pushes.

Wireless web has value when it lets users access tiny
bits of time-critical, user-specific, important
information. Stock quotes. Account balances. Shipping
status. Emergency notices. And such. Advertising has
so worn down consumers that they will never consider it
time-critical or important. Leave the wireless web to
its best uses -- tiny little niche applications that
companies will buy to better serve their customers.
Not portals, not advertising, not anything that
requires a) location detection; b) violation of user
privacy; c) more than about 50 words.

Kim Brooks
(Skeptical Marketer At Large)
CentralPath Integrated Response
http://www.centralpath.com





Received on Tue Feb 06 2001 - 15:04:19 CST