Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Mobile Ads 2.0

   

   JB, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 1:07pm

   
   

   Successful ads will probably be brand-recognition banner ads, not click-through, similar to old-fashioned mobile ads 1.0 (billboards).
   
   (Although billboards sometimes do prompt an immediate action, such as getting off at the next exit to go visit the world's largest ball of string.)

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 1:16pm

   
   

   "As the iPhone has shown, it is possible to design a rather competent browser that can show "the full web" on a mobile phone."
   
   Take RIM's mobile browser, please. It sucks, period! The idea that the web will continue to create two views of content, Mobile vs Standard, over the long term is absurd. The iPhone is the thin edge of the wedge that is breaking out full internet access on a mobile device as standard functionality. I can't wait to see what the competition does in response.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Not what we've seen

   

   Alex, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 1:48pm

   
   

   I work for a major web publisher who also has one of the leading mobile content sites. Our research has shown the opposite of what you state: click-through rates, as well as other important metrics such as ad and message awareness, are actually higher on mobile than on our site and vs. web industry standards.
   
   The current line of thought is that this is because mobile ads are still new and somewhat of a novelty and that, in time, metrics will fall in line with where the web is now.
   
   As to the "mobile web" vs. the standard web on a phone such as an iPhone, there will probably be a place for both. A mobile phone screen is not, and will never be, like a monitor. It is much smaller. Likewise for a mobile phone keyboard or pointing device.
   
   Therefore, for some applications and content, there will be a need for content specifically designed with a mobile device in mind.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   Re: Now what we've seen

   

   Brian, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 1:53pm

   
   

   "The current line of thought is that this is because mobile ads are still new and somewhat of a novelty and that, in time, metrics will fall in line with where the web is now."
   

   
   I agree, but I think a lot of clicks can be chalked up as purely accidental. The less intuitive user interface and methods for navigation on a phone can lead to a lot of miss-clicks.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Embedded

   

   Rafael A. Junquera, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 2:16pm

   
   

   I think the mobile web is more on the application side. Ads added to games, music, SMS. For web ads, I agree that it has to merge with current ads on websites.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   mobile web

   

   Mike B, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 3:10pm

   
   

   I can never even get the "mobile web" to work right on my blackberry. Or on my old sprint phone for that matter. I never stop to think if I should be using .mobi or not, and whether the site has handlers in place to recognize my mobile browser. Frankly, the "mobile web" is full of suck.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Re: Not what we've seen

   

   Mike (profile), Jul 7th, 2008 @ 4:43pm

   
   

   I work for a major web publisher who also has one of the leading mobile content sites. Our research has shown the opposite of what you state: click-through rates, as well as other important metrics such as ad and message awareness, are actually higher on mobile than on our site and vs. web industry standards.
   
   That's surprising. On Techdirt, we serve up separate ads on the mobile version, and I can say that while we get decent mobile traffic, the ads get almost *no* clicks. Well below our web average.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   mobile CPM

   

   Venkat Ram, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 6:20pm

   
   

   The click through rates for mobile ads are highly dependent on the type of campaigns. While some ad campaigns have been so successful (10% click through rates), others have not. So I am not surprised when someone says they haven't seen any clicks at all. I think once location services starts rolling then mobile advertisers can make use of the location of the user and serve more targeted ads. That is sort of what Google wants to do, Admob wants to do and even Nokia. Location based targeted advertising will be huge.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   scott, Jul 7th, 2008 @ 9:01pm

   
   

   In my opinion "the mobile web" is here to stay and will be driven by advertising for the foreseeable future. In many respects the mobile device is in the same boat as the large screen media device (aka TV).
   
   The user experience for a mobile device will be different from the user experience for a desktop device if those experiences are optimized. I suspect that there will be more ways to optimize the user experience for interactive advertising on mobile devices than on desktop devices. After all, we take our mobile devices with us when we go shopping.
   
   Content will also be optimized. I can see cheap reusable devices underwritten by sponsorships and location based subsidies. Free WiFi will expand. Android is free. Mobile hardware evolution will eventually slow down to a snail's pace and most mobile hardware will become commodities.
   
   What is standing in the way of this?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    Re: Re: Not what we've seen

    

    TO, Jul 8th, 2008 @ 8:15am

    
    

    I don't think anyone with knowledge of the mobile web would dispute that click rates on mobile sites are much, much higher than online sites get. If you don't believe me simply do a search on Google under "mobile click through rates".

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    Mobile advertising viability

    

    Rapole, Jul 8th, 2008 @ 2:21pm

    
    

    Mike seems to contradict himself in his opening sentences. I also work in the mobile space for a large publisher. The click through rates are 10x to 20x what is online currently. Yes, they will level out like online, but not to the lower levels predicted. As for the suggestion that many of the clicks are "accidental", we've got the back end metrics and user volunteered data to suggest differently.

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment