Crisp Voices Blog
APPropos? Are native mobile apps as supportable as mobile web apps?
20 Jul 2009 - Nick SmolneyIn my last post on Crisp Voices I was talking about the inclusion of mobile components in superbowl advertising, which seems to have only further cemented the need for a mobile solution as part of a complete offering for advertisers and publishers, and kicked off a banner year for the industry. Despite the global economic downturn, things here at Crisp have been busier than ever. In general mobile has faired much better than other industries in these hard times. A lot of this is due to the overwhelming success of new platforms and the popularity of more direct channels for users to get content.
Obviously iPhone is the golden child, in just one year, they have seen over 1.5 billion downloads and 65,000 apps are now available to users. While that seems insurmountable, Android has been steadily growing and is now up to 5000 apps. Pre, Nokia and Blackberry all recently launched their stores so it will be interesting to see how much traction they are able to gain, not to mention Windows Mobile which is still waiting in the wings.
The proliferation of all these app stores (all with different requirements and approvals) only succeeds in further fragmenting the development landscape. The whole appeal of the iPhone from the developer’s point of view was that it was a single platform for which you could write one application and reach a huge install base. Apple managed to one up the carriers by offering a bigger piece of the pie (70% of revenue versus the 50% or lower) and actually spend some money on marketing the apps thus helping to inform the user base about the products. But the real draw was the ease of development. Why deal with the hassle of trying to develop apps for all the phones a carrier supports (which they mandated you must to do to get on their deck) when you can spend less effort on the iPhone and make more money.
The iPhone has been a runaway success , but it’s store is getting saturated with apps and soon content providers will turn their attention to other less crowded platforms. Rather than try and build (or contract) an app for each device in each store, why not consider a mobile web presence instead?
Take it from a project manager whose whole focus is on delivering as efficiently as possible, mobile web is significantly easier to support than a plethora of apps. Just to make one change for an app (assuming you did it all in-house) requires you to recompile all builds. Then you need to get it recertified and hope your end users all upgrade. If these weren’t in-house, you have to contact the contractor(s) and coordinate this whole process with them. Alternatively with web, you can fix the issue once, roll it out to all devices at the same and since you do your own quality control, this can all be done much quicker. Not to mention with the web, the user is presented with the latest version every time they visit, so there’s no need to upgrade.
Reasons to consider mobile sites:
- Portability – easier to develop for all devices (even ones that aren’t out yet)
- Upgradability – you control when and how often, and aren’t encumbered by store approval
- Scalability – You can make use of you existing advertising/reporting/streaming/hosting solutions for PC web on your mobile web site.
- Cost effectiveness – the reasons above equate to significant cost savings and an easier, more manageable pipeline.
- Cross linking – the ability to link from one site to another. This is a big issue when it comes to sending the content from a PC user to a mobile user, or sharing links with your friends, or taking advantage of social media.
- SEO – we have mentioned it here before, but I will reiterate. Search is going to be huge. The content on an app is not searchable. How will your users find your content?
- Getting better every day – mobile web browsers are gaining new features all the time, some of which are users only associate with downloadable apps (we’ll be highlighting just how Crisp is using these in future posts).
Alternatively for Apps
- Hot - They are currently what users are gravitating towards. Not necessarily what they want.
- Best performance – of course on device apps do have direct access to the processor and can push the limits of the hardware, but assuming you aren’t building a 3D game, chances are your app doesn’t need this anyway. Pretty soon even 3D games will be in browsers
As you recall, mobile web apps were all the rage until Apple stopped hyping them and instead focused on the downloadable apps. You can’t really blame them considering they do get additional revenue from the downloads (vs. nothing for web apps). Had they given equal billing to each, I assure you things would look considerably different. All it will take is one of the big guys to stop supporting apps, and start pumping some marketing into mobile web and this will begin to gain traction with consumers. Considering that even Google is now saying they don’t have enough money to do apps on all devices, maybe the time is now for you to evaluate your long term mobile strategy and weigh the options.
Mobile Rich Media and Metrics Were the Buzz at IAB Mobile
17 Jul 2009 - William Nann The turnout at the recent IAB Mobile event in NYC demonstrated the seriousness with which mobile advertising is being viewed by leading brand agencies. From my impressions at the show, and reviewing the Twitter stream later, the major themes were “beyond the banner” advertising and mobile advertising effectiveness.
Beyond the Banner
While the dancing dude from the Dockers shakeable ad captured the audience’s attention, an overlying theme of the conference was rich media or beyond-the-banner ads. In-app and mobile web advertisers are leveraging the power of the smart phone experience to offer ad units like click-to-video, full-page interstitials, location-aware ads, and accelerometer-leveraged ads like the Dockers example. Whether it is the novelty or the interactivity of these ads, it was clear from the presentation, and our experience, that beyond-the-banner campaigns are generating metrics that surpass those of online campaigns.
Mobile Advertising Effectiveness
Another highlight of the panels was Microsoft’s presentation, which shared the results of a recent Dynamic Logic study on mobile advertising effectiveness. The study showed a 200 percent lift in brand favorability and 140 percent increase in purchase intent. Medialets also compared the results of an online campaign with an in-app mobile ad campaign and found that online, consumers interacted with the video ad for an average of 12 seconds compared with 42 seconds on mobile. The Weather Channel, Jumptap, ESPN and others all discussed significant CTRs and conversion metrics on mobile.
Each of these topics points to the evolving maturity of the mobile advertising market. ESPN pointed this out best with some fairly strong opinions about the role of premium publishers in selling and delivering these rich mobile campaigns. Brian Colbert, Director of Mobile Ad Sales for ESPN, felt that mobile has achieved scale and called mobile ad networks premium publishers’ “biggest competition.” Of course, at Crisp we couldn’t agree more, which is why we collaborate with premium publishers to empower their digital teams to sell mobile and achieve maximum revenues (see our blog post.)
Next up, DigiDay Mobile and ThinkMobile in September. Going? Send us a tweet and let us know so that we can meet up.
Attn. Publishers: It’s Time to Sell Your Mobile Ad Inventory
6 Jul 2009 - Tom ForanI wrote an article recently for MediaPost’s Online Media Daily called Field of Dreams II: The Mobile Advertising Story that was seen by some as slamming mobile ad networks. On the contrary, mobile ad networks play an important role in the mobile advertising ecosystem for remnant inventory.
The underlying point of this article was to call out premium publishers who are relegating their mobile sales strategy to ad networks instead of selling premium inventory to their own advertisers. In our discussions with premium publishers, many have expressed their dissatisfaction with the way some ad networks transparently represent their inventory and they are expressing a desire to sell this inventory direct through their existing digital sales team.
So if you are a publisher with scale (>1 million page views per month), think twice before you hand over your inventory to mobile ad networks. Don’t be satisfied with $1.00 CPMs. Empower your ad sales team to sell mobile, in particular rich, beyond-the-banner ads. These ad units generate excellent CTR and user engagement and sell for much higher CPMs.
Still need a push? Crisp provides end-to-end services to make selling, buying, and tracking mobile advertising simple and easy. We are industry leaders when it comes to mobile ad serving, rich media ad forms, reporting, robust advertiser sites and collaborative (not competitive) sales support.
What are your thoughts? Leave your comments here or on my article, looking forward to hearing what you have to say.
Recent Entries
- Crisp to Present at Upcoming Mobile Advertising Events
- The SXSW Interactive Mobile Thriving Guide (iPhone)
- What Does Apple Blocking In-App Location Ads Mean for Mobile Advertising?
- Google's New Click-to-Call Ads Not so New to Crisp
- What the iPad Means for Advertisers
- Crisp's Rich Media Ad Support for the Apple iPad
- Introducing Adhesion, The First Fixed Placement Ad Technology for the Mobile Web
- Apps Call, But Will Your Phone Answer? Maybe Not.
- 5 Predictions for Mobile Advertising in 2010
- Making Sense of the Mobile Advertising Ecosystem
Topics
Blogs We Read
Archive
Get our blog posts directly in your inbox.
Sign up for our email newsletter.







