Did you know the fifth largest U.S. mobile carrier has over 20 million subscribers but doesn’t own cell towers? Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are shaking up the mobile marketplace as we know it. They’re filling in the gaps of top-tier carriers and quickly gaining subscribers who are attracted to their lower pricing options and creative marketing practices.

In this video, 3Ci’s vice president of channel sales talks about how traditionally MVNOs have successfully targeted niche markets. Plus, he shares insights into how the new wave of MVNOs will be data driven, riding the high-speed networks to create customized solutions for their consumers.

To request a platform demo or to find out how 3Ci’s cloud-based, mobile platform helps many of the largest MVNOs drive stronger consumer engagement and increase a customer’s lifetime value, please click here.

International CTIA Wireless 2011 takes place March 21-24, 2011 at the Orange County Convention Center in Orlando, Florida and 3Ci will be in attendance.

International CTIA WIRELESS is where the wireless world meets each year for three days of intense business, learning and networking. The show is the premier wireless event representing a $1 trillion global marketplace that brings together wireless and converged communications, wireless broadband, and mobile web.

If you would like to learn more about 3Ci, or schedule a meeting with 3Ci at CTIA Wireless 2011, please email us at sales@3Cinteractive.com.

Given the advent of Google’s Sidewiki toolbar, is a truly semantic web soon to follow?

Reportedly Google is using “multiple signals” based on the “quality of the [Sidewiki] entry,” combined with what they know about the author (presumably derived from the author’s Google profile), as well as user-contributed signals such as voting on an entry and flagging. Apparently the same driving principle behind Google’s search results is at work with Sidewiki. Google is said want to keep only the most relevant entries appearing.

Additionally, Google is reported to be employing methods that measure the entries use of sophisticated language, the user’s reputation, and the user’s history when determining relevancy. Which leads to the question…will wide-spread adoption of Sidewiki lead to development of toolbar-specific entry optimization strategies?

The past few months have seemed to be nothing short of disastrous for mobile marketing.  The economic downturn that led to the current recession is certainly not friendly to the market outlook, let alone to falling advertising revenues and a decrease in handset sales.  The recent GSMA Mobile World Congress in Barcelona served as a showcase of how simple and elegant a mobile marketing solution can be.

Mobile marketing in this downturn makes sense when you consider the idea of more people having access to mobile phones than they do to the Internet. Yes, the rallying cry for mobile dominance over the PC has been sounded for years, but we are seeing the proof of concept.  Marketing campaigns utilizing SMS can reach more people than a banner ad or a PPC ad accessible via a PC.

You also have the added comfort of knowledge in that consumers elect to receive or opt-in to get your marketing message on their mobile device.  This extensive, qualified reach (as well as the lack of a prevailing, incumbent player) has attracted the interests of Nokia, Google and Yahoo.  Mobile marketing may still only be a small part of most marketing budgets, but it is growing in influence and is proving itself with value and results.  Mobile may prove to be the one marketing medium that flourishes in the downturn.

In 1989, Apple Computer started developing the Newton platform.  Complete with state-of-the-art handwriting recognition software, the platform was brilliant.  As amazing as the platform was, the world wasn’t ready for the Newton.  Steve Jobs and others have looked back on the Newton and speculated its inability to capture a large audience.  The booming success of the iPhone—inspired by the Newton and iPod—has only made people look harder.

Jobs thought the Newton was too focused on input when it should have been focused on consumption. The technology was sound, but consumers shied away from another input device. Jobs had the same feeling about Palms, and other PDA’s: they wouldn’t become mainstream because of their design.

The iPhone’s design made it easier for users to adapt. The device allowed the user to spend more time consuming information and not inputting information.

The same is true for traditional cell phones. No one likes creating a new address book contact. You’re lucky if a person types a first and last name, let alone a full address. Consumers want to spend a few seconds entering a phone number, or pushing a few buttons, and the rest talking or reading.

SMS is the same way. A lot of companies want to use mobile to capture e-mail addresses, or full responses from end-users. My response is always the same, “Yes it will work, but there are much more effective ways to use mobile.”

The biggest, relative hump in a mobile marketing program is the initial opt-in. This is usually the largest input from the end-user (i.e. keyword & short code), and it must be initiated by the user. After the initial opt-in, the best mobile programs minimize input, at most, asking for number, letter, or keyword replies.

I’m a junkie for companies that have mobile alerts or services. Right now my favorites are Mint, Twitter, and Jott. Mint and Jott are used more frequently than Twitter. Why? Jott and Mint send me alerts that I consume to stay on track. Even on an iPhone, I rarely use Twitter to Tweet; instead I use mobile alerts to know when I receive a direct message.

For the most effective mobile program, capture your consumers and PUSH them alerts or actions.

I just read a great article about Mobile Marketing targeting teenagers.  It was full of stats that support my thoughts on the mobile response rates of teens. I hate to pigeonhole Mobile Marketing as a “teens only” medium—especially when I am selling to big brands that liberally use the “teens only” objection. These agencies are usually hesitant to implement mobile into their marketing plans because they incorrectly assume that texting is for teenagers who don’t have the buying power of the 25-55 year olds.  They believe their brands won’t see an immediate impact because no one in the 25-55 yr old demographic texts. I continue to disagree with them and I know—based on campaigns that 3Cinteractive has successfully run for our clients— the older demographics are texting and interacting with brands via SMS.

Of course, teens embrace texting more rapidly than the other demographics—just look around any corporate board room. The older generations in the room either didn’t know how to text 12 months ago or they learned how to text from their children. That’s fine, just know that everyone is texting these days. That’s right. Everyone. It is the ultimate direct response vehicle. The key is to figure out where the mobile advertising and mobile marketing opportunity lie and capitalize on that knowledge.

Now, lets dig in to see some statistics on teens’ willingness and openness for Mobile Advertising. Great insight can be gained from analyzing the stats and charts in the article. Look at the second graph at the bottom. Teens were more likely to respond to a Poll or Survey using a short code, but check out the other two bars on the graph. Teens were less likely to respond to SMS ads or use a short code displayed in an advertisement. That is huge for brands and agencies targeting non-teens. Their judgment about teens response rates is actually backwards! Their non-teen target is more likely to respond to their ad. So in the end, teens embrace the newest technology first, but the older demos go deeper and have a greater acceptance. Great news for our agencies and brands trying to gain the attention of the 25+ crowd.  Take a look below…

- Chris Field

Read the rest of this entry »

Steve Ballmer is in an interesting situation. This past week he’s had to address tough challenges with two of Microsoft’s biggest competitors: Apple and Google. Translation: mobile, search, and advertising.

In his most recent letter to employees, Ballmer specifically addressed Apple, Yahoo!, and Google. As many know, Ballmer has pretty much called it quits on their bid for Yahoo!. In the meantime, Apple has continued to grab chunks of the PC market, and the iPhone is dominating the smartphone world.

Ballmer has announced Microsoft’s intent to spend a lot of money acquiring companies to heal their search engine wounds several times. So far they’ve acted, investing $240 million into Facebook (Oct. 2007), and there are reports that the relationship is becoming even closer. This isn’t a bad move from Microsoft. They can’t seem to buy their way back into the search engine ranks just yet, and they need to find exposure for their ad network.

But I wonder: is Microsoft really getting the most out of their relationship with Facebook? Most of what Ballmer has talked about has been purchasing to compete with Google, instead of researching and redesigning. It reminds me of the Intuit vs. Microsoft story (see: Inside Intuit). Back when Intuit was first designing Quicken, they beat Microsoft by effectively researching the target demographic and designing a product to meet their needs. In contrast, Microsoft approached the issue by designing Microsoft Money the way they felt software should work. In the end, Microsoft’s extremely high marketing budget would fail to get Money to consumers, and Intuit’s better designed product won out. For me, that story has been a big lesson: understand who you are designing your product for.

Apple and Google have succeeded by understanding the needs of their audience. The iPhone OS is more intuitive and stable than Windows Mobile, and Google search actually pulls up legitimate results. Microsoft needs to spend more time looking at their audience and designing their product appropriately. They actually did very well with the XBox; it’s not a surprise this was designed through a separate product development process.

Facebook can be a saving grace for Microsoft, but not in the way they seem to be working right now. Instead, Microsoft needs to take full advantage of its exposure to 70+ million web consumers and allow them to influence their next product. The information age has changed, no longer can Microsoft be the second or third mover and expect to succeed by throwing more money at the problem.

- Ainsworth