Skip to main content

More Marketers Reach Customers with Cell Phone Ads

Image
By
Cell phones play a very important role in our lives, and marketers have utilized the potential of mobile ads to reach target customers. According to Sheth at the Wall Street Journal, the money spent on cell phone video ads is predicted to grow from last year’s $12 million to this year’s $90 million. By 2014, this number will increase to $485 million, which contributes to $1.8 billion of cell phone advertising. Over the years, cell phone ads have moved from the “traditional” banner platform to “rich-media spots,” --- where ads can be expand to a whole cell phone screen, featuring videos and/or games. With rich media, marketers can hold cell phone users’ attention and charge more for ads. As compared to banner ads, which cost between $8 and $15 per thousand impressions, costs of rich-media ads range from $15 to $50 per thousand impressions.

One challenge, however, is to play the “right ads” to the “right” customers. I expect this problem would be an “easy-fix” because cell phone carriers already have rich market data of their subscribers. Regardless, it is important to allow cell phone users to opt-in and opt-out the options of receiving rich-media ads.

We have discussed the business applications of cell phones in this blog (i.e. employee recruitment , mobile coupons , and iPhone travel apps ). Now, it is time to think “rich” when implementing a mobile marketing strategy.

References:
Sheth, N. (2010, August 6). Newest Cellphone Ads Crave Entire Screen. The Wall Street Journal, p. B7.
Picture was downloaded from: http://tinyurl.com/linchikwok08102010P
Labels:

Comments

  1. Research Term PapersAugust 10, 2010 at 11:07 PM

    I want to thank you for providing this useful information about web services!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is It OK for Hotel Staff to Wear Piercings and Tattoos?

By
Time has changed. I see more and more college students wearing piercings and tattoos nowadays, but is it OK for hotel staff to wear piercings and tattoos? The answer is “no, no, no.” According a report at USAToday.com, customers across the board do not want to see any hotel workers with pierced eyebrow, pierced tongue, tattooed arm, or nose ring. Some may argue that tattooed and pierced workers may seem more acceptable in edgy boutique hotels as compared to the big franchised hotels, but the survey results did not find any differences among a variety of lodging products. Many respondents believe people who wear visible tattoos and piercings are taking a high risk of their professional lives. If you stay in a hotel, do you mind being served by tattooed and/or pierced staff? What if you are the one who makes the hiring decision? References: USAToday.com: http://tinyurl.com/linchikwok08042010 Picture was downloaded from http://tinyurl.com/linchikwok08042010P
28 comments
Read more

Where Coffee Meets Culture: My Experience with Orientation, Socialization, and Culture at Dutch Bros (by Karina Martinez)

By
When people think of Dutch Bros, they usually picture colorful drinks, loud music, free stickers, and baristas so friendly they’ll jump in the car with you.  As someone who has had the opportunity to work for Dutch Bros, I can say that the energy customers feel isn’t an act; it is the result of intentional and effective HR practices that are focused on orientation, socialization, and culture. From your very first day, you experience how these practices shape the entire Dutch experience.  Orientation, Socialization, Culture   In HR management, orientation is the introduction of the role and company to new hires. This is intended to help them feel welcomed and informed. Socialization goes beyond the initial training process; it’s how new hires grasp the organization’s values, behaviors, and traditions over time. Together, these fun...
5 comments
Read more

Average/Below-Average Looking People Can Earn as Much as the Attractive Ones

By
Research has shown that attractive people can not only charm interviewers (and thus get hired easier), they are also more likely to earn more as compared to those with average or below-average looks. Accordingly to a Wall Street Journal report , attractive people can earn 3% - 4% more than a person with below-average look. If such difference adds up over a person’s lifetime, an attractive person can earn up to $230,000 more than an ugly worker; even an average-looking person can make $140,000 more. Another relevant Wall Street Journal report also suggests that workers who exercise regularly can earn 9% more than those who do not. If that is the fact (I believe it is), is it legal? Can employers do that? Linchi Kwok and Otto @SyracuseU Career Fair To my knowledge, no law or regulation under EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) considers a person’s look as a protective class. It is true that people in general have an idea of what kind of person they feel attract...
33 comments
Read more