Mobile advertising and your phone bill

Posted by: Michael Disabato

I’ve been reading with interest the articles on Fierce Wireless about mobile advertising strategies. One states that personalization is the key, and another states that protecting subscriber’s information central to acceptance of mobile advertising. Both are interesting reads, but miss the central point: the mobile billing model is broken and will not work for mobile advertising.

In Europe, the originator of the SMS or call pays for the call. Not so in the U.S. Here, the originator AND the recipient pay. If you are on separate networks, the operators get to double dip. Fair? Nope, but that’s how it is.

In a mobile advertising scenario, that means you get the privilege of paying for content you may or may not want. In the case of content you opt in for, you are paying to receive an advertisement that can only benefit the advertiser. Clearly THIS model is broken and needs to change.

Let me know what you think on this.

Michael

Comments

[Susan McNeice, Global Director, Communications Infrastructure Systems & Software]

The charging (billing) model you are describing is called "calling party pays", and it is the same as wired telephony in virtually all markets.

In mobile, voice calls are charged on the both ends for US consumers, but the advent of the large 'bucket' of minutes/messages and free calls within a network (either the operator's or the caller's) has desensitized many consumers to being charged for a call or message.

As to SMS, there are vendor capabilities for delivery of "Free to End User (FTEU)" messages, which is the same as "Calling Party Pays" in voice. Expect this to become the norm quickly.