WSJ’s Big Hype Job on Mobile Advertising
My b-detector is buzzing like crazy: WSJ has outdone itself: it has done a page 1 story on mobile advertising, basing it on a still-to-be-proven startup AdMob (which has about $4 million funding from Sequoia), primarily, and then other older companies like Third Screen Media. Also, then some obvious info that Google, DoubleClick and others are entering the space. To say that mobile advertising is a huge opportunity in U.S. is a ridiculously ill-considered claim to make, much less on a front page WSJ story.
Here’s a typical statement: “It’s the next Internet gold rush: With two billion cellphones around the world, upstarts and technology giants alike are scrambling to find ways of making money from cellphone ads”. Really? Give me a break, honestly. And yes, for a more balanced view on things, read our sister site MocoNews.net.
Posted In: Advertising, Mobile
Newsletter
Comments (1)
Jan 17, 2007 8:19 AM
Rafat,
You will learn my friend. You will learn.
Jan 17, 2007 2:25 PM
Why so negative? I know it is early and no one is making money yet but the early indicators I’ve heard are pretty good. Certainly the article is a little frothy but I’d think that this type of press would be good for moco in general?
Jan 17, 2007 7:06 PM
Well, the jury is still out (you note.. “yet to be proven”). The challenge in mobile ads is how to position without ticking off the subscriber. The WSJ piece noted that something like only 15% of handset users browse the internet from their phones. If I accept that number, it’s still a huge potential market - HOWEVER, all these “browsers” are PAYING for the priviledge and you can’t gunk up their little screens with ads and get away with that business model. I think the model needs to change…. Could data usage be subsidized by mobile ad revenue? I think wireless carriers need to mull that one over (Can I increase my data penetration if I drop my price - even give it away, through ad-supported revenue?). I’m quite sure the data “take rate” would increase if the price dropped substantially and those of us who are expert mobile surfers would probably be willing to endure some amount of ads in exchange for a lower bill. I realize I’m making an assumption here, but wireless carriers will not be able to fling ads at their subs without passing on a carrot (reduced/free data service).
Jan 17, 2007 8:36 PM
Rafat, Proven startup is called company ;)
Jan 17, 2007 10:37 PM
The last thing people want on their phone is spam.
it’s fun to imagine AdMob is the next Google Adsense.
everyone making money off contextual services.
but that is a unproven fanciful dream,
I just don’t see someone driving their car and reading mobile ad’s
best of luck however.
thankfully I don’t read WSJ or Forbes for tech news
its usually wrong, stale, or both.
I’ll stick to my plethora of noble mobile blogs.
Jan 18, 2007 12:46 PM
Advertising is key to companies like Cellufun.com—and we have proven that you can deliver a great experience to our users, for free. Companies like Admob have been very helpful in proving the market.
Jan 24, 2007 2:07 AM
I can’t read the whole article, not being a WSJ subscriber but ... I’d been thinking about writing something—ok, investigating the potential for—advertising in Asian mobile markets. This doesn’t seem far-fetched to me. Am I missing something?
Of course, users would have to accept some discounts in exchange for seeing ads. People everywhere appear to think that ads are a small price to pay for internet content and TV. Even in poor Asian countries, it seems that every vendor and her grandmother has to have a phone, though the price would seem prohibitive. A little discount means a lot. Ditto for young kids in richer Asian countries; and they spend a lot more time playing dumb games and downloading music with their phones than their counterparts do in the West.
As for cars ... Even in Japan, relatively few people are driving to work or school.
Am I missing something?