This is a really great article that shows the true nature of the underbelly in the data / list brokering business. The author admits that he doesn't necessarily have any solutions, but admits that the industry could benefit from a good clean-up.
I've written recently about suggestions I have regarding data brokering services and all of the suggestions are focused on the idea of transparency. Be transparent when you collect the data from the consumer, be transparent about what data you hold on your consumers, and be EXTRA transparent in managing their opt-in permission for all forms of marketing as well as for permission relating to the sharing of data.
Of course a lot of this depends on marketers seeking out only legitimate data brokers. This means that marketers have just as much responsibility for todays situation as do the list brokers. Like the drug dealers, "as long as there is a market" defense - list brokers say the same thing. As long as marketers want access to cheap lists and don't much care how they got them or the quality of the opt-in - there will be dicey list brokers around.
Of course the best option is to take the high road and work hard to build your own list organically - never sell or rent access to your hard earned customer data and ensure that every communication with your customers is of good value to the customer. That's right - organic free range lists are the best.
I must get at least 40 e-mail newsletters a day - each of which may contain 6-20 different stories. Some are relevant - some are ridiculous - and some are just not worth the electric bill I pay to display them. And what remains - well what remains are articles that I feel are worth sharing or at least worth writing a few words about. Here's the list for today:
Another article about the future of door drop marketing and how it is soon to change. What kills me is that it has taken an environmental financial impact to get this far. Ask anyone about the amount of rubbish shoved through their letterbox and they will tell you they've wished they could stop it for years - but didn't know how. And yes - if D2D is today - newspaper inserts are tomorrow. Hurray! Again we get rid of more untargeted marketing -- but here is where this author and I part company - you see - he works for the enemy.
Hugh is a data provider. That's right. He's one of those people who sell - Ok "rent" - information about you to direct marketers everywhere so that you get addressed junk mail instead of bulk untargeted junk mail.
I would like to amend the Data Protection Act to require every data controller who shares, rents, sells or distributes my data to a 3rd party to be required to get my permission ANNUALLY to do so. Every year the data controller must send me a letter asking for my express permission to share my data with 3rd parties. Oh yes - and the letter must include a complete list of all information which will be shared. I want to know "What you know." - and I want to have the default be that you "may not share" any of my data.
This would allow good and responsible brands to build their own CRM data bases and to use them in a responsible and measured way... say a regular newsletter to me. And if a brand builds a relationship with a trusted partner then, rather than selling my data on they could offer their partner the opportunity to advertise in the newsletter I'm already receiving. I guarantee you that if that happens the number and quality of "trusted partners" will change.
I'm supportive of brands maintaining their own CRM systems and definitely in favour of building trust and sharing the wealth with trusted partners. But it should be done in an open and transparent way.
Excellent article... and I agree completely. I am in the mobile industry and I get frustrated with my Nokia N73 trying to access a mobile web site. The Vodafone connection is flakey - 3G is not very fast - the processor on the device makes the experience sluggish - the display is tiny and of course there is no keyboard. It means I have to be REALLY bored - or REALLY desperate to take the time and energy to use the mobile web. Thank gawd Vodafone finally made it affordable or that would be yet a 3rd hurdle.
Another point whic is buried in the article that I will bring out - 3G, EDGE or any mobile network access is not sufficient for the majority of people who are actually using mobile Internet today. That's right - they are all using WiFi in one way or another - T-Mobile WiFi in Starbucks - or BT Openzone in the hotel. No one is using 3G or EDGE for real serious mobile Internet access.
A nicely written article taking a reasoned approach to the pitfalls and benefits of mobile marketing done right. Traditional marketers who want to just buy a list and spam the world an hope for .5% return should not bother reading for fear they might learn something... ;)
Another one of these "statistics for dummies" opportunities....
Subway tested the program, called My Subway Mobile, in the Buffalo area in August 2006 in 12 locations. Company officials report franchises realized a 50 percent coupon-redemption rate during the trial, significantly more than the typical 2 percent to 3 percent response rates from traditional paper-based coupons.
Accordng to Modiv Media consumers must double opt-in before being sent relevant offers. Good for them! -- But that means you had to run a traditional marketing campaign which probably had a 2%-3% response rate - and then lost another 1/3 to 1/2 of those during the double opt-in process - leaving you with people who REALLY wanted the coupons -- and then -- now the statistic for the article - 50 percent of those coupons sent were actually redeemed.
It's amazing - I think I'll have these guys write a business plan for my bank manager... Nah...
And these - these are the challenges of mobile advertising: (not mobile direct marketing - not SMS spam - but mobile ADVERTISING!)
A Nielsen study cited in Advertising Age found that only 10% of mobile data users responded to ads on their mobile phones. Another 11% viewed the ads but did not respond, and nearly eight in 10 did not view the ads at all.
More than one-half (53%) of those who ignored the ads said they were not interested in what was being advertised.
More than two-thirds of mobile data users thought that mobile ads were unacceptable. However, nearly 45% of mobile video viewers were willing to watch ads in exchange for an unspecified benefit.
Targeting the right mobile users with the right messages remains a challenge.
So - we are displaying BILLIONS of ads now - but with what effectiveness?
Actually - if you compare the fact that 10% of users responded to a mobile ad to what percent of users respond to a web banner ad - that sounds pretty good!
That's right - the EU wants to designate 20% of any automotive ad to factors relating to CO2 emissions, fuel economy - AND OTHER THINGS CONSUMERS CARE ABOUT! -- Sure - we can look it up on the web or ask the dodgy man at the dealership - but if it's right there in front of us it might make a difference. Or will it.
We all know how much effect the marketing on cigarette packs has had. Here in the UK the entire bottom 1/2 of the cigarette box is covered with messages like, "SMOKING KILLS". People still buy cigrattes.
Trust me - the guy who wants a snazzy red sports car for his midlife crisis will look right past the fuel economy and the CO2 information. The sports car ads will still sell sports cars. And the majority of "reasonbly priced family cars" - they are already competing on these issues anyway so they give 20% of the adspace to this topic rather than 5% -- They'll put bells and whistles and dancing annoying things (ala CrazyFrog) around the data to make it palatable. And for those who don't know about Jamba ... Here's my sign off for today's summary.... it's a gift.... really....
Be sure to head over to Rudy De Waele's m-Trends blog for this week's Carnival of the Mobilists. There's lots of coverage from the conference season and boy - does these people have a lot of opinions! Read the Carnival HERE.
Mobile is often referred to as the third screen as it is not the primary source of content but mobile is a true ‘body’ media – it’s the only media device we always have with us and should be regarded as the first screen, which can drive consumers to other traditional media such as television and print. We’ve already seen Mobizines on mobile phones which can encourage the purchase of the actual print title and similarly, short programme previews and additional content on mobile can be used to drive viewership to traditional television programming.
In general I think this is a very sound article which covers off so many of the pitfalls of mobile marketing - but I disagree with the point in the paragraph above. - I believe that the mobile is an extension of a consumers life - not an extension of a brands advertising campaign. The mobile is most likely the "last screen" in that brands will continue to build a long relationship before engaging in a dialogue with the consumer which may ultimately end in foot-fall into a brick-and-mortars shoppe.
49% conversion rate... Hrmmm.... I wonder what that means? Does that mean that 49% of the people that were sent Bluespam invitations they agreed to download the content? Or does it mean that 49% of the people who downloaded the content eventually wound up in the booth at the fair.
Or - my personal favourite - does it mean that 51% of the people who were hit with Bluespam by someone walking around with an electronic Bluespam harness got a good swift punch in the nose for being annoying idiots?
How brave are these folks to actually wear a Bluespam device? Email spammers hide in foreign countries, typcial Bluespammers hide behind billboards and posters - but to actually "wear" the device. Now that takes a lot of guts - very few brains - or a whole lot of beer.
Ok - seriously now - if the person wearing the Bluetooth marketing harness was also wearing a T-shirt letting consumers know what was happening - and if the range was set to 1M or less - then I think it has some real potential. But I would change the mechanic so that consumers would need to take the action - not the device. Again - make it pull - not push.
With the latest Bluetooth standard there is a new feature which allows a quick touch-n-transfer capability so all a consumer has to do is touch their phone to a receiver to give permission for content to be sent. That will start making things for Bluetooth much more marketing and much less spam!
If you are a Verizon subscriber then this article is for you!
And while we are talking about places who make loads of money from using your data and selling it to list brokers and advertisers - don't forget about Experian, Equifax and TransUnion.
Each of these credit bureaus knows your home address, your employer, your salary, your credit history - and everything else -- and they regularly sell access to this information to 3rd parties.
Do you get dozens of credit card offers in the mail - this is where they come from? Loads of loan offers - same place. You can write to each credit bureau and tell them they are not allowed to use your information and a lot of your junk mail will dry up.
And for a complete list of places to go (for US Customers) and opt-out of direct marketing try Credit Source Online.
I believe that all marketing should be an opt-in process -- and so to start that we have to Opt-Out of everything and then build trusted relationships with brands and companies and allow them to make offers to us that are Timely, Relevant, Valuable and Requested (TRVR).
I've always thought that "interpretation" is the source of most debate. Facts are black and white to some - and Red and Green to others. The data is always the same, but it is the other information and experiences that makes interpretation unique.
In this case I think I can offer a 180 degree view on each of the main points in the article:
Advertising will clearly play a major role in the growth of the mobile web, both in terms of consumer demand and in terms of who are the competitive suppliers.
Well - not exactly. I believe that consumer demand for mobile content will drive the opportunities for mobile advertising. The growth of the mobile web will be a result of content owners and service providers having a better understanding of what consumers want and how they use this content. And offering advertising as a means to subsidize the cost will allow mobile advertising to grow. i.e.; -
An increase in mobile web content and services will offer greater opportunities for growth to mobile advertising.
From the 2nd paragraph:
On the other hand as eMarketer points out, mobile users are easy to annoy and don’t want mobile advertising
This is completely taken out of context. Mobile users dont' want mobile direct marketing - they don't want text message SPAM. This is not mobile advertising - which is the use of banner ads and other in-line advertising with mobile content. Let's get clear on what consumers do and don't want - but first let's get clear on the terminology for the industry.
Ok - the point on Mobile Search:
This may explain why Bena Roberts finds that Google Adsense for the mobile web does not seem to be attracting advertisers.
I've never been a fan of mobile search. The reason why mobile search isn't taking off right now is that the majority of people in European and North American markets ( i.e.; those who have ready access to a PC for Internet access ) don't use their mobile phone for "search" - they use it for "find" - Find me a pizza joint. Find me directions to my meeting. Find me the time my next train leaves for Manchester. The range of things people use their mobile to "find" is far smaller than the range of things people "search" for at home on their PC.
I contend that users will not try to search for a holiday from their mobile - nor will they research a new television or washing machine - find their long lost Aunt Millie in Boston.
And what is this all about?:
The present structure for mobile advertising does not seem to satisfy any of the stakeholders.
The current model for mobile advertising is working and growing. Look at companies like AdMob and ThirdScreen -- making huge headway and offering good ROI to advertisers. Everyday there is new content and new advertising partnerships and opportunities. And everyday more websites offer a mobile accessible version which means that mobile banner ads have a suitable destination for click through. And regardless of what this author thinks - mobile targeting is some of the most accurate and rich targeting around. Between information from the mobile network operators - and the content owners - mobile advertising is incredibly targeted. What the Gphone will bring (if there is a Gphone) will be good - but not differential in the area of targeting.
So - it's an interesting article but let's just say that there is more than one way to interpret all of this data.
This is a nice press release but what makes it interesting is that they are offering it only on the O2 network. There is no reason to limit their audience to just an O2 network offer unless they are building it into the O2 portal to offer consumers cheap/free mobile data charges for the content.
With the move by mobile operators to flat rate mobile data - and the elimination of walled gardens - there is no longer a need to align a campaign like this to a specific mobile operator.
It's articles like this that really make me wonder why we are surprised that mobile direct marketing is getting traction - and it is all for the wrong reason.
15-25% response rates - From the 1% of the original marketing you used to capture your opt-in lists - is great... But they don't mention that you need to work hard to earn your customers trust and offer real value through traditional marketing in order to secure someone's opt-in permission.
And don't even THINK about buying a list of numbers. You want to get hit with the SPAM label - then sure - go for it. I don't care how good the 3rd party opt-in permission claims to be. People who are already irritated at the thought of getting SMS mobile direct marketing will be even more irritated at you - and your brand - when you start sending them messages and they don't know you - haven't given you their number and generally have no interest in your product.
A bit of hype is part of marketing. It is all about the spin. But come on folks. Let's get real. Mobile direct marketing is either going to change to a responsible form of meaningful trusted dialogue - more CRM than customer acquisition -- or we're going to kill the beast altogether and be left with mobile advertising via banner ads and mobile search. (Which - by the way - is not such a bad thing.)
So - my point is this. If you read about mobile offering incredible resopnse rates. Ask them to show you the data. Ask them how they got the source numbers. Ask them what creative they used to build that list of opt-in permissioned mobile numbers. Ask these late night informercial jockeys the questions that make them squirm --
Brought to you - almost live - from the Symbian Smartphone show in London - the Carnival of the Mobilists #95. A great jumping off point to all things hot and topical in the world of mobile by some of the best and brightest in the mobile blogosphere.
Great little article by a very savvy young lady in New York on how to combat the issues with mobile SPAM in the US ( sorry folks - no help for no US mobile SPAM from this article )
E-mail SPAM delivered as text messages.
The underlying point that I would like to make is that when you call your carrier ( AT&T, Verizon, Sprint ) make sure that you tell them you want to turn off messages sent as E-mail and delivered as SMS.
CAVEAT!: Be warned! When you do this you may stop messages that you want. You may not get messages from airlines telling you about gate changes - and you may not get appointment reminders from your dentist or hairdresser - and you may not get updates on when the plumber is going to be coming to your house. All of these businesses rely on E-mail to SMS delivery.
What you really want is a web page where you can "white-list" the people who can send you E-mail and have it delivered as SMS. Maybe that's your partner or your mother - maybe that's a service person. Be default - no one can send you these messages.
How to ask to stop the SPAM:
Some customer care people are likely to understand what you are asking than others -- so if you need help making your point - tell them that you want to stop messages sent to an address like ( assuming you are on Cingular ): number@cingularme.com
Wikipedia has a nice SMS Gateway article which tells all! From here you can see a list of all E-mail to SMS gateways as well as some websites where you can send SMS messages. In general, websites are tougher for a spammer to use.
Stopping Spam from a short code
If you get a message from a short code ( that would be a 4 - 5 - or 6 digit number ) then you have probably chosen to opt-in to some form of service (like ringtones) or entered a contest (like American Idol). If you want to find out who is sending you those messages - Check the Short Code Reigstry here.
Once you know who is sending you the messages then you can contact them and ask them to stop. You should also be able to reply to these messages with QUIT or STOP and the service provider is obliged to stop.
SPAM from the mobile phone provider...
It may not be surprising to know that the majority of what consumers consider SPAM is actually sent by the carriers themselves. Consumers will call anything they decide they don't want SPAM - whether or not the sender can pull an opt-in permission out of the hat or not. The amount of TRUE SPAM is actually pretty low these days when you take out the e-mail to SMS gateway SPAM. Call you carrier and tell them to that you want to opt-out of any and all marketing messages - that will help!
Crack - I mean Blackberry SPAM
Here is an article from a man who has a very detailed solution to ensure the maximum effectiveness as a road warrior who depends on mobile Email.
And last - but by no means least - We are heading into an election year. Be very wary of giving your mobile phone number to anyone even remotely connected to politics or you'll be getting a text messages like there isn't any tomorrow. Political SPAM is exempt from CAN-SPAM ( which is largely a piece of legislation to give people guidelines on how they CAN SPAM you legally - USELESS! ).
If you find this useful - please send the link to the article along to others. If you know of any other helpful tricks - feel free to pass them along and I'll update the article. In general - let me know your thoughts!
I commend the IPA for taking the high road - even if their views were not endorsed by the industry heads making this decision.
If direct mail were to be made opt-in it would have a significant positive impact across the board in consumer views of direct marketing, a reduction in waste materials and a reduced green house effect from lower delivery volumes.
But those in the industry see this only from the myopic view of their own business. From Royal Mail to all of the supporting mail houses - reduced revneues. For the DMA's part - if there is only opt-in then the ability to sell and market lists is greatly reduced because so few of the lists allow for opt-in - especially from 3rd parties. I do not deny that they economic impact would be significant.
How can we find a way to protect the businesses who are most threatened by this - their employees and their share holders - while taking the high road when it comes to economics, being green and consumer preference ( which in case you missed it - is to STOP getting as much junk mail as possible from ALL sources )
I'm also still watching for the DMA or another agency to finally bring an opt-out solution for door-drop-marketing. How can you stop the endless tide of take out menus, estate agent flyers and other junk that comes flying through your letter box? Any ideas?
Just so you know, the Netherlands has an excellent solution and their economy hasn't fallen down!
He added that while legislation would be too complex to set up for the doordrop industry, a door sticker initiative, in use in the Netherlands since the 1990s, could soon be a reality in the UK. The door sticker, which is also in use in France, Germany, Norway and Belgium, allows consumers to opt out of unaddressed mail completely including free newspapers, or to opt out of undressed mail but opt-in to free newspapers only.
If this article hasn't gotten your full attention - then go grab a coffee - close down the e-mail and give this a read.
This is one of the best illustrations I have seen of "mobile marketing" described right - done right.
The campaign addresses key issues in mobile:
Discoverability - Offering the initial consumer contact online
Ease of use - The consumer has a simple experience to get content they want on their phone
Engaging - More than just a ringtone or video clip - using a mobile game to engage the consumer with the brand is an excellent play.
Repetitive - By using a "leader board" consumers are driven back to the game to see how they stack up and to play the game again to try to better their score
Results driven - The game and content offer high levels of data capture offering the brand greater insights into the consumers they are engaging
By executing the campaign in this way they are being fully TRVR Compliant! (Timely - Relevant - Valuable - Requested) -- Is your marketing campaign just clever - or is it TRVR?
Update: There are a couple of disparaging blog posts floating around on this topic - from people who may not have fully grasped the ideas here. The Nissan Rogue FLASH website is not designed for mobile and from what I can tell was never supposed to be. That said, I'm still trying to find the Online2Mobile section of the Nissan website.
A law firm has sent out a general note asking for comment as they consider suing T-Mobile because T-Mobile won't turn off text messaging for specific consumers.
Well - this seems to be a fairly easy issue to resolve. If US carriers were to adopt the "sender pays" model of mobile network operators across Europe - the issue would go away.
There are 2 other possible options:
Change the model for some consumers so that it is free to receive. If the consumer isn't going to get charged - there is still the annoyance factor - but there is no longer a commercial impact.
Deactivate the E-mail to SMS Gateway based on consumer request. This is fraught with pitfalls because invariably the consumer who wants to have the gateway turned off still wants to get their updates from United Airlines when the gate changes - and they will not necessarily understand how this is related.
T-Mobile operates a GSM network - and text messaging is integral to the network infrastructure. Without getting into too much technology - text messaging uses the same process as making your phone ring. Turning off text messaging completely means no longer receiving calls either.
And as I mentioned above - what is the real driver here? Is it cost? - Is it mobile SPAM? - or is it that T-Mobile isn't Burger King - and you can't "have it your way."?
A bit of extra insight...
In GSM networks outside the US the commercial model says that only the person who sends the message pays. ( Yes - there is an exception in the case where the receiver is roaming internationally ).
Of course it isn't as simple as just changing the commercial model - there is one other major factor in the US market which has to be reviewed: E-mail to SMS gateways.
Literally 100's (if not 1,000's) of businesses make use of the ability to send an e-mail and have it appear as a text message on a consumer's mobile device. These e-mail to SMS gateways are free and used for services such as flight time departure updates - service delivery updates - even birthday messages. And if you change the commercial model to one where the sender pays, then all of these gateways have to be upgraded so that they can charge.
If all e-mail to SMS gateways started charging the businesses ( rather than the customer who receives the message ) then many of these services would go away. And what that means is that the carriers would see a drop in revenue.
Four years ago I talked with Verizon about this topic during a meeting of the Mobile Marketing Association. Not only were carriers worried about losing revenue from shutting down the e-mail to SMS gateways - there was another reason why they needed these gateways to exist - consumer education.
Text messaging is part of everyday life for most people across Europe. But in the US it is only now starting to catch on. The first text message voting show - American Idol - allowed text messaging to break into the public consciousness in the US - but there is still a long way to go before US carriers could achieve up to 20% of their revenues from text messaging - like their European counterparts.
I often get asked the question, "Why isn't text messaging big in the US?" - And there are a number of reasons - but the most significant are these:
Until April 2004 it wasn't possible to send a text message from one network to another. The US has 2 main technologies for mobile phones - CDMA and GSM. Text messaging was developed by a bunch of engineering geeks almost as a "fluke" associated with the GSM networking standard. CDMA had to develop it's own implementation of text messaging from scratch. {Some SMS History}
Economics 1: The GSM model outside the US is "sender pays" - meaning that you never pay to receive a text. In the US you get charged to receive a text message or it counts against your total number of text messages for the month. (Different carriers have different packages including some which are all-you-can-eat-send-or-receive ) As long as a consumer "might" get charged to receive a text - they weren't interested. Some people would actually call up their friends and say, "Stop sending me text messages!"
Economics 2: The text message phenomenon in Europe occurred largely because it was cheaper to send a text message than it was to make a 1 minute voice call. Admittedly, voice calls from mobile phones in Europe are much more expensive than in the US. And here again - there are a couple of drivers. 1) the majority of people in the US are on contracts - which include 100's or 1000's of free minutes. The majority of people in Europe are on pre-paid arrangements with an average balance of £5 at any given time. The bottom line - A US mobile user says, "It's free to call someone - it may cost me to text them - plus texting is hard to do!"
A minor 4th point: Voicemail. People in the US love their voicemail. Everyone has voicemail - some people have 2 voicemails. In Europe voicemail is much less prominent because mobile operators charge consumers for voicemails - (and frankly the Italians just don't like it!) Without voicemail, Europeans love to send text messages as it is a cheap and easy way to get a message across even if a person is unavailable.
So - those are some of the reasons why SMS is different in the US than it is in Europe - and some of the reasons why you don't have law firms considering whether or not they should sue T-Mobile.
"Poyhonen also argued that operators would be able to use the information they have about users, their profile, location to provide an intelligent and convenient user experience for the user, and to help internet providers and content partners, who normally know nothing about heir users without engaging them in a registration process, provide a better experience."
Here! Here! -- Let mobile network operators do what they do best -- and that is to run mobile networks.
Unlike traditional fixed line ISPs, mobile networks have an opportunity to provide a "smart pipe" to both consumers and service provides alike.
Now - if we can just get the operators to stop trying to sell services and build unrealistic pricing models!
Bluespamming - Bluetooth Marketing: ICO removes guidance for Opt-In permission.
This week the Information Commissioners Office ( ICO) in the UK updated their guidance on electronic communications for marketers as it relates to the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) 2003. One of the updates involved removing Bluetooth from the list of communication methods requiring opt-in permission. Here is the relevant text before and after:
Before:
In other words, both email and text, picture and video marketing messages are considered to be ‘electronic mail’. Marketing messages transmitted using ‘Bluetooth’technology, for example, messages sent to all ‘Bluetooth’ enabled handsets within a given radius, are also considered to be ‘electronic mail’, as are WAP messages. WAP Push allows a sender to send a specially formatted SMS message to a handset which, when received, allows a recipient through a single click to access and view content stored online, through the browser on the handset. (View the entire guidance v 2.0 Dec. ’06 )
After:
In other words, both email and text, picture and video marketing messages are considered to be ‘electronic mail’. Marketing transmitted in WAP messages is considered to be ‘electronic mail’. WAP Push allows a sender to send a specially formatted SMS message to a handset which, when received, allows a recipient through a single click to access and view content stored online, through the browser on the handset. ( View the entire guidance, Version 3.1 Oct. '07)
What does this mean?
Up until this week, the ICO guidance required that Bluetooth marketing campaigns comply with Opt-In permission in the same way as E-mail. But now Bluetooth is no longer covered by this guidance and as such may not require opt-in permission.
Both the Direct Marketing Association (DMA-UK ) and the Mobile Marketing Association (MMA) are strong advocates of permission based marketing. Even the ICO states that, legislative definitions notwithstanding, their good practice advice for any type of marketing would be to avoid sending people marketing they do not want. If you read the websites and marketing collateral from Bluetooth marketing companies they also will assert their commitment to permission based marketing. So – what’s the problem?
When a consumer walks by a Bluetooth enabled poster their phone will buzz or beep and display a message, “Do you want to receive content from xxx?” It is this invitation message which is the subject of much discussion and debate. Should the consumer have given their opt-in permission before receiving this invitation? Both the DMA and the MMA say, “Yes.” – Bluetooth marketing companies say “No.”.
Many Bluetooth marketing companies assert that if your phone has Bluetooth turned on and visible then you have given an implied consent to receiving contact from them. The counter argument states that just because your have a public listing in a telephone directory it can not be implied that you wish to receive telemarketing sales calls.
“Whilst it is understandable that the ICO sees Bluetooth as falling outside of the PECs legislation in terms of its underlying technology, it is important that the principles underlying the PECS are not lost.” … “We recommend to our members to err on the side of caution when considering the permission implications of Bluetooth but we would certainly like to have a more definitive legislative position. The question is under whose auspices now that it is not the ICO's.”
Laura Marriott, President of the MMA, reasserted the commitment from the MMA to maintain the sustainability of the mobile marketing channel through a member dedication to an opt-in experience for the consumer, “It has to be a pull – not push – marketing experience.” says Marriott. "We believes that permission should be secured from the consumer before the Bluetooth announcement, 'Do you want to receive content from xxxx?' ". The MMA is currently developing best practice guidelines which will specifically address Bluetooth.
What is likely to happen now?
The very intimate and personal relationship between a consumer and their mobile device makes marketing to them a very sensitive issue. When someone’s phone beeps, vibrates or otherwise begs for their attention it interrupts whatever they may be doing at the time – but if that interruption is unwanted then the communication becomes a negative brand experience for that consumer. And this applies whether SMS or Bluetooth – and without regard to ICO guidance.
With Bluetooth having been removed from the ICO guidance it is likely that a number of Bluetooth marketing companies will capitalise on this opportunity to contact brands and agencies formerly cautious about deploying a Bluetooth solution due to concerns about the ICO regulations. Brands who are concerned about permission based marketing due to concerns of perception by consumers associated with Bluetooth SPAM are likely to remain cautious regardless of the changes to the guidance. Other brands will see this as having been given a "green light" to use Bluetooth without need to worry about regulatory compliance. The net effect will be an uptake in more campaigns to experiment with Bluetooth marketing across the UK.
Looking abroad to other countries where direct marketing legislation is opt-out rather than opt-in we can already see where major brand names are engaging consumers via Bluetooth marketing in high visibility trials such as Land Rover’s Bluetooth enabled billboard in Times Square and the new trial in New York’s Grand Central Station executed by CBS to promote several high profile television shows. Read more... It is reasonable to assume that we can expect to see more of these types of campaigns here in the UK in the very near future.
Today an estimated 51% of UK consumers have used Bluetooth - and that number jumps to 74% for those aged 16-24. ( Carphone Warehouse Mobile Life Report 2007 ) thus making the addressable market for Bluetooth marketing quite high. The limiting factor will be the number of businesses and advertisers who take up this new technology and roll it out in a broad way. There is still some time before we have a “Minority Report” style experience where our phones buzz and beep constantly as we walk down the high street. But that time is growing shorter.
If you would like to read a more detailed interpretation of the ICO’s recent decision, as well as to learn more about Bluetooth marketing and how it can be done in a truly permission based method – please register for your copy of the report, “The Future of Bluetooth Marketing: A best practice approach to maximising results from proximity marketing.”
For many of us this is a hot topic - please do leave a comment!
Read more on the ICO change at:
Out-LawBluetooth spam on the way as watchdog gives marketers green light The RegisterInfo chief shrugs off Bluetooth regulation Wired.com Dumb Regulators to legalise Bluetooth SPAM PCProBluetooth no longer protected by anti-spam laws
Since consumers first started to use SMS marketers have had the idea of text message marekting
or marketing sms - also known as mobile marketing. And since that time marketing sms messages
have grown and changed and new technology like bluetooth marketing, marketing bluetooth style to
phones in close proximity to an advertisers.
And since the e-mail spam scourge took over the media, people have worried that there will be mobile
phone spam. Spam is just another way of saying that advertisers send unsolicited text message
marketing, marketing sms, bluetooth marketing or any other form of mobile marketing - it's mobile
phone spam. There are even guides on how to spam phone s.
Consumer Preference is about permission based marketing, permission marketing solution. If, as
an advertiser you can execute permission based marketing campaigns then you can certainly find
ways to benefit from mobile marketing. And permission starts with understanding the consumer
marketing preference. If you can understand consumer marketing preference, then you can execute
permission based marketing. And permission marketing is not mobile phone spam.
There are many mobile marketing company listings that can be found on the Internet - and most
mobile marketing company websites will tell you how they focus on permission marketing. Make
sure that the one you partner with does more than tell you about it on the website. Opt-in
marketing starts with your traditional marketing soliciting for permission.
Yes - Mobile marketing starts with traditional marketing - print, web, radio, television -
all of the old standards. Because before you can send the first message to a consumer, you
must obtain their permission... and that means that you understand consumer marketing prefernce.
Please enjoy reading consumer-preference.com - and if you feel that there is a point I'm making
you'd like to share - then put a link to it from your own site. And always feel free to leave
comments!
Troy Norcross
About Me
Name: Troy Norcross
Location: London, United Kingdom
I believe very strongly that consumers have a right to privacy. Just because it is getting harder to reach consumers doesn't mean that marketers should be (or need be) more devious or more forceful in their attempts to reach us. In fact, quite the opposite. Many of us are happy to be contacted with relevant, timely, meaningful offers. But it's going to be on our terms. No longer victims of aggressive marketing, we want to participate in the process with trusted brands and partners.
Come and hang out with me here on Consumer Preference and learn how as a consumer you can have more control than you thought - and, if you're a marketer, how you can reach people in an effective and respectful way. You can reach me at the email link below.
