The Association of Online Publishers (AOP) in their annual census across 1,500 publishers and brands identified investing in mobile skills as a top agenda item for publishers in the year ahead.
Where To Invest?
Publishers that adopted mobile early will continue to test the promise offered by this channel whilst expanding their efforts into identifying business models that will replace declining revenues from existing channels, keep existing customers engaged and win new audiences. In pursuit of these objectives, investments should focus on the broader distribution of content and improved ability to monetise content effectively.
Investing In Distribution
Currently, mobile apps, almost exclusively iPhone apps, continue to be favoured as the best way of making content available on mobile. It almost guarantees a desirable user experience and whether charging for downloaded apps or providing them on a sponsored basis they are easy to monetise. However, with other smart phones enjoying more prominence, publishers that want to maintain an app only approach will need to develop them across several platforms or risk missing the opportunity to provide services to a broader customer base.
The other mobile channels - mobile internet, messaging, mobile video – also offer publishers a platform for distributing content to their readers, providing sponsorship opportunities to their advertisers and attracting new audiences. These should be considered alongside apps as additional methods for the delivery of content.
Mobile Internet - Data describing handset characteristics and capability is readily available and can be easily incorporated into mobile website publishing systems. This makes it easier to publish mobile sites that will adapt to each handset and ensure that the consumer gets the best user experience regardless of the handset that they are using.
Although it is not yet possible to provide as rich an experience when compared to apps, developments in HTML 5 are allowing the gap to be closed. Publishers wishing to broaden the audience that they can reach without going down the route of developing apps for each platform can still provide consumers with a rich experience through mobile internet sites.
Messaging - Messaging can be used to drive indirect content distribution. For example, SMS can be used to deliver scheduled notification or reminders of content availability. Links can be included with each message to ensure easy and immediate access to that content. Messaging in combination with suitable mobile payment options can also be used to sell subscriptions or support occasional content purchases.
MMS, is typically underused for business applications but it does provide a method for the delivery of rich content that can include text, audio, images and video. Several niche online and mobile only publications are already using MMS to distribute content rich news letters on a free or subscription basis.
Mobile Video - The rapid rate of smart phone adoption together with more readily available access to data subscriptions is allowing more and more consumers to enjoy mobile video content.
Whilst mobile video streaming is highly dependent on the willingness of network operators to provide sufficient bandwidth, the ability to quickly download clips that will last for a few minutes provides a practical alternative to streamed video or mobile TV. Whether it is news, information or entertainment, packaging this type of content as mobile video clips provides a rich, sharable user experience to consumers with appropriate smart phones.
As Publishers continue to invest in online video production, encoding content for distribution via mobile should also be considered.
Integration With Existing Channels – In adopting mobile more aggressively, integration with existing print and online channels should not be overlooked. As an example, some publications are already using 2D codes and short codes in print and online to connect with readers.
2D barcodes or SMS short code / key words combinations can be printed alongside product descriptions or featured articles. Readers can capture barcodes using readers installed on the phone and be directed to a mobile website for further information. Alternatively, readers can send a text message to the short code and receive an SMS that contains links to mobile sites or other downloadable content such as mobile video clips or eBooks that deepen their engagement with the product.
Mobile's Many Angles
There are many areas that Publishers should consider when incorporating mobile as a core part of their digital strategy. Apps are just one of them. Both Mobile Internet and Mobile Video continue to grow in importance and offer the possibility of enabling publishers to distribute a variety of rich content to their readers.
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Sunday, 21 March 2010
Google Sees Price Of Mobile Ad Units Increasing. Are There Alternatives?
The mobile industry is united in the thought that the use of mobile search and the high response rates associated with mobile ads will continue to grow. Taking this view one step further, Google exec Gundotra expects the actual price per mobile ad unit to increase and ultimately exceed the price of desk top ad units.
Paid Search Is Already Expensive. Can It Really Go Much Higher On Mobile?
One consequence of the increasing cost of paid search is the shift of budgets to Search Engine Optimisation. Another, more recent consequence is the growing use by marketers of Social Networks. Both of these will put pressure on the price of desktop search. This will be carried through to mobile.
Are There The Budgets Support Higher Priced Mobile Ads?
What Will Marketers Allocate To Mobile Search?
Challengers To Mobile Search
Mobile search is on the increase and marketers do want to tap into this channel. However, marketing ROI is ultimately more important than the fashion of using mobile. If the cost of mobile search ad units does soar, there could be a shift away from search to other mobile channels and social networks.
Paid Search Is Already Expensive. Can It Really Go Much Higher On Mobile?
For mobile ad unit pricing to increase, marketers will have to
- Increase their overall marketing budgets and
- Increase the amount that they allocate to mobile
One consequence of the increasing cost of paid search is the shift of budgets to Search Engine Optimisation. Another, more recent consequence is the growing use by marketers of Social Networks. Both of these will put pressure on the price of desktop search. This will be carried through to mobile.
Marketers continue to shift their budgets to more personally engaging channels rather simply increase them. Mobile and social networks are amongst the beneficiaries. To anticipate a growth in the price per mobile ad unit and at the same time a growth in the use of mobile ignores the growing importance of Social Networks as a direct to consumer channel. Social Networks will continue to gain at the expense of mobile and here again, mobile search will come under pressure.
What Will Marketers Allocate To Mobile Search?
Determining the budget that should be allocated to mobile is difficult for advertisers and will continue to be so whilst it remains difficult to measure and evaluate the effectiveness of mobile advertising. comScore’s recent efforts in producing an industry standard model for mobile metrics will start to make measuring some aspects of mobile more transparent. This in turn will ensure a greater allocation of budgets to mobile. However, the increase will be shared across all mobile channels – Mobile Apps, Messaging, Mobile Video – not just search, and this too will put pressure on the price of mobile ad units.
Mobile search is on the increase and marketers do want to tap into this channel. However, marketing ROI is ultimately more important than the fashion of using mobile. If the cost of mobile search ad units does soar, there could be a shift away from search to other mobile channels and social networks.
Thursday, 11 March 2010
m-health sector’s healthy opportunities? - Same old claims, same old problems
There is once again much focus on the opportunities presented by the m-health market. Several major mobile network operators have announced “new” m-health initiatives. O2, Orange, Vodafone (NYSE:VOD) and MTN are amongst those active in some way in the m-health market.
In fact m-health is not at all new since many of these operators have been active for a number of years. Orange for example announced the creation of their Orange Healthcare division back in 2007.
Before m-health it was e-health and along side these, tele-care, tele-medicine and other similar names exist to describe solutions that essentially have the same objectives. These are to alleviate the systemic pressures that are endemic in the healthcare industry such as the rising cost of healthcare and the inability of healthcare service supply to meet demand for services. These objectives are just as relevant to developed countries as well as developing countries. With the latter there is more focus on being able to deliver some form of affordable healthcare more broadly across the populations.
Statistics still not translating into Market Size
The McKinsey & Company report speaks of a $50bn to $60bn market for m-health in 2010 and cites this as one reason why operators are stepping up their efforts to create and deliver m-health services.
The magnitude of demand that will drive this market is based on a study of 3,000 consumers across 6 countries. Even though the countries involved in the study have the largest populations in the world, the number of consumers involved in the study is statistically insignificant given the fact that a large part of the target market is the 4 billion people using mobile phones that are struggling to access affordable healthcare.
The report suggests that 70% of respondents were very interested in using at least one m-health product and that “a surprisingly high number” were willing to pay. They would be, but this is not the same as saying that they could pay in which case the claimed market size starts to shrink quickly and significantly.
So what happened to e-health et al?
Analyst’s expectations for tele-care, tele-medicine and other related markets never reached their market expectations. Many pilots have been carried out and much experience has been gained. Work has been repeated and re-reported but the reality is that long-term commercial successes have been few. Most of the projects are government or research funded and do not readily translate into commercial success. Simply put, the huge potential is not matched by the ability or real willingness of people to pay despite what they say when questioned in a survey. Will it be any different for m-health?
Segment the m-health market to get a better understanding of the true market potential
In any consumer market, segmentation of the sector is critical in determining product / service functionality and price points. The m-health has yet to be subjected to this discipline in any substantial way because the market is still largely driven by government grants and research donations. The requirement to prove the technology, process or benefit far outweighs the requirement to prove the cost benefits.
At one extreme, sending SMS messages that carry public healthcare information and general advice to remote regions can easily be costed and is generally affordable. At the other extreme, solutions require the provision of high tech, personal medical devices that connect to remote monitoring centres either directly or through mobile phones. These kinds of solution are not affordable by developing countries and are only available on a limited basis in developed countries.
Search for the appropriate value chain continues
Over the years, the drive to incorporate technology as a key aspect of personal healthcare delivery has suffered from technological, logistical and legal issues amongst others. It is fair so say that with mobile operators being involved in m-health great strides can be made towards resolving some of the logistical issues. After all which industry is better placed to deliver and manage data and physical products directly to end users on such a grand scale? It is also fair to say that with organisations such as Continua driving standards for medical monitoring devices and electronic patient records great strides continue to be made towards resolving some of the technological issues that keep the availability of monitoring devices low and their prices unacceptably high.
The legal and support issues however remain largely unresolved. If anything, they will become even more complicated for anything other than simple SMS based m-health solutions. Who will take responsibility for loss of, or non-delivery of data at a critical moment? How can medical data, recommendations and advice be validated, assured, audited and tracked in an m-health driven system? Will the medical profession get behind m-health en-masse? If they do, how will the profession deal with the increased demand for advisory and follow-up services generated as a result of the sudden and huge increase in customers?
The role of mobile operators
Despite the size of the potential market, it continues to remain difficult to provide affordable solutions to a segment of the m-health market that would generate the most benefit for consumers and healthcare service providers alike.
If, by their involvement, operators are able to create an environment in which more of these support issues can be resolved, then further steps towards the mass adoption of m-health will have been taken.
In fact m-health is not at all new since many of these operators have been active for a number of years. Orange for example announced the creation of their Orange Healthcare division back in 2007.
Before m-health it was e-health and along side these, tele-care, tele-medicine and other similar names exist to describe solutions that essentially have the same objectives. These are to alleviate the systemic pressures that are endemic in the healthcare industry such as the rising cost of healthcare and the inability of healthcare service supply to meet demand for services. These objectives are just as relevant to developed countries as well as developing countries. With the latter there is more focus on being able to deliver some form of affordable healthcare more broadly across the populations.
Statistics still not translating into Market Size
The McKinsey & Company report speaks of a $50bn to $60bn market for m-health in 2010 and cites this as one reason why operators are stepping up their efforts to create and deliver m-health services.
The magnitude of demand that will drive this market is based on a study of 3,000 consumers across 6 countries. Even though the countries involved in the study have the largest populations in the world, the number of consumers involved in the study is statistically insignificant given the fact that a large part of the target market is the 4 billion people using mobile phones that are struggling to access affordable healthcare.
The report suggests that 70% of respondents were very interested in using at least one m-health product and that “a surprisingly high number” were willing to pay. They would be, but this is not the same as saying that they could pay in which case the claimed market size starts to shrink quickly and significantly.
So what happened to e-health et al?
Analyst’s expectations for tele-care, tele-medicine and other related markets never reached their market expectations. Many pilots have been carried out and much experience has been gained. Work has been repeated and re-reported but the reality is that long-term commercial successes have been few. Most of the projects are government or research funded and do not readily translate into commercial success. Simply put, the huge potential is not matched by the ability or real willingness of people to pay despite what they say when questioned in a survey. Will it be any different for m-health?
Segment the m-health market to get a better understanding of the true market potential
In any consumer market, segmentation of the sector is critical in determining product / service functionality and price points. The m-health has yet to be subjected to this discipline in any substantial way because the market is still largely driven by government grants and research donations. The requirement to prove the technology, process or benefit far outweighs the requirement to prove the cost benefits.
At one extreme, sending SMS messages that carry public healthcare information and general advice to remote regions can easily be costed and is generally affordable. At the other extreme, solutions require the provision of high tech, personal medical devices that connect to remote monitoring centres either directly or through mobile phones. These kinds of solution are not affordable by developing countries and are only available on a limited basis in developed countries.
Search for the appropriate value chain continues
Over the years, the drive to incorporate technology as a key aspect of personal healthcare delivery has suffered from technological, logistical and legal issues amongst others. It is fair so say that with mobile operators being involved in m-health great strides can be made towards resolving some of the logistical issues. After all which industry is better placed to deliver and manage data and physical products directly to end users on such a grand scale? It is also fair to say that with organisations such as Continua driving standards for medical monitoring devices and electronic patient records great strides continue to be made towards resolving some of the technological issues that keep the availability of monitoring devices low and their prices unacceptably high.
The legal and support issues however remain largely unresolved. If anything, they will become even more complicated for anything other than simple SMS based m-health solutions. Who will take responsibility for loss of, or non-delivery of data at a critical moment? How can medical data, recommendations and advice be validated, assured, audited and tracked in an m-health driven system? Will the medical profession get behind m-health en-masse? If they do, how will the profession deal with the increased demand for advisory and follow-up services generated as a result of the sudden and huge increase in customers?
The role of mobile operators
Despite the size of the potential market, it continues to remain difficult to provide affordable solutions to a segment of the m-health market that would generate the most benefit for consumers and healthcare service providers alike.
If, by their involvement, operators are able to create an environment in which more of these support issues can be resolved, then further steps towards the mass adoption of m-health will have been taken.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
