Tag: ad-funded

Blyk scraps it! No, it doesn't!

On 17/05/2009

Blyk, the ad-funded MVNO for 16-24 year-olds has been in the news lately a lot. The trigger was a piece by NMA according to which Blyk had announced it would scrap its consumer offering and concentrate on selling its technology/concept/both to other operators. This was quickly refuted by Blyk. The “final” position appears to being a little unclear.

Now, quite a while ago, I issued concerns about the viability of their business model as a stand-alone ad-funded MVNO (see here), and I stand by it (even if they have varied their model a little recently: from 217 free messages and 43 minutes of free calls per month to a £15 discount voucher). If they now claim that this was “only” a proof of concept, I must say that this smacks more than a bit of hopeful PR although this may just be semantics:

The pitfalls of an MVNO-only model aside, their approach is rather intriguing: if you can segment the market as they do and thus create consumer (or people) clusters that are much more homogenous than most media will be able to assemble (18-49-year-olds anyone?), you have a fairly powerful opportunity to interact with your people more directly, more intensely and – most importantly – more relevant messages than you otherwise could. And this has value, and lots of it!

Combine this now with the headaches of your ordinary operator, of which the biggest one probably (still) is churn. I am lacking current accurate numbers but, historically, an operator’s churn rate (the percentage of users it would lose in 12 months) was up to 1/3. And this is painful, very painful! So get a tool that allows to reduce that churn significantly and you’re off to the races. Combine this with a (functioning because highly targeted) advertising model and you can even increase your margins on this model. Sounds good? Certainly does to me!

And so it is not a big surprise that other operators are said to have shown a lot of interest in the model. Vodafone, for one, have had their own advertising-related announcement in the last week, and the use of Blyk’s model and expertise could be quite compelling to them (as some voices already suggest). From Blyk’s point of view, such a model is also easier and more quickly scalable than a stand-alone expansion and it should therefore greatly aid Blyk to build the critical mass it needs to stay (or become) relevant to advertisers.

It might still fly, you know…

Image credit: http://asetcenter.net/images/article/mobile_adv.jpg

No ad-supported content after all? Really?

By Volker

On 12/09/2008

We will all remember that ad-supported content was the flavour of the month a short while ago. There were successful trials and a lot of hype all around, hell, there are even MVNO based on this model. Now, however, there is a survey that suggests that people will pay to avoid ads (if you are a true believer, look at the end of this post though…). Who’s right then?

But, alas, the nasty consumer wants to have it all, it seems. I quote:

While the vast majority (56%) believes that content downloads to mobile phones should be free of charge, there is a growing number of consumers that are so averse to advertising that they are now willing to pay a premium in order to avoid it, signifying a shift in how operators need to be tailoring their offering. A substantial 25% of respondents said that they would rather pay for a download if it guarantees them immunity from advertising.

Now, what then? Free content? And who is paying us poor sods who produce it? Hmm. Now, it gets even more confusing: according to the study, in particular the younger demographic shuns ads. 35% of the 16-24 year-olds would rather pay than get ads vs. only 17% of the (presumably battle-hardened and more cynical) 35-44 year-olds; one would have thought so that the elders with their higher spending power were more likely to pay… Hmm, hmm.

There is another interesting twist to this though. Another quote:

One symptom of this trend is the increased resistance to targeted advertising on mobile phones. Whilst 47% of people feel that adverts tailored to their individual tastes and interests are a good idea overall, half of those who were willing to receive targeted ads on the internet were not happy to receive them on their mobiles.

This would suggest that there is a trend (or rather demand) to bridge the boundaries between media: offer content and do, by all means, use advertising to finance it but do stream the latter to other user screens (presumably the PC first and foremost). Are there any models out there to address that? I haven’t heard of any and I must say that I find implementation of this rather tricky to achieve. Just another study then? Hmm, hmm, hmm.

NOW, just when I clicked “publish”, I received one of my favourite newsletters, the very recommendable VentureBeat, who published an interview with Nielsen’s SVP Mobile Media, Jesse Goranson, and, what can I say, he says it’s all good: according to yet another study he cites (which I cannot access), 53% of advertisers (ah, not consumers then) anticipate a rise in mobile ad-spend in the next year. Goranson does, however, also state a flux and indeed uncertainty about where it is going to go revenue-wise. More hmmm’s then, I guess. Good night!

Blyk now at 100k subs

By Volker

On 24/04/2008

Now, I will not claim that they ramped up their efforts as a result of my comments a few days ago, but Blyk announced today that they breezed past the 100,000 subscriber mark. So, well done them!

It does not however alleviate my concerns about the general business model, I have to say. They are not revealing ARPU or anything like that. The overall constraints of the ad-funded approach do, I think, remain. I stand to be corrected but would need to see a more robust business parameters to be convinced…

PS: Thanks to BitRabbit for the heads-up!

Blyk: ad-funded MVNO revisited

By Volker

On 20/04/2008

Ad-funded MVNO Blyk‘s business is something I had long wanted to comment upon but, alas, never got around to. But as it was now reported that they increased their advertiser base from 44 to 117, now here we go…

Blyk is an ad-funded MVNO stricly for the 16-24 year-olds. It launched in September 2007 in the UK (running via the Orange network) and, on its website, promises to roll out to go “pan-European” this year.

Does it catch on? Blyk recently reported that they reached 30,000 subscribers in the UK and would ad 3,000 per week. However, they had also said they’d hit 50,000 by March and I have yet to hear of that milestone; even a Google search doesn’t reveal any progress report beyond the 30,000…

There has been some talk about issues in signing up to the full service but that may well be from rumour-land, so let’s ignore it here.

As a Blyk subscriber, you get 43 minutes of voice and 217 texts a month for free as long as you opt in to receive up to six ads to your phone a day. After that, Blyk subscribers, all of whom are pre-paid users, pay 10p (US$0.20) per text and voice calls are charged at 15p (US$0.30) per minute. Applying these rates to the free voice and texts, you get services worth GBP 28.15 (c. US$ 56.30) per month for free. This is therefore the amount they need to make back from advertisers (who include Sony Ericsson, Coca Cola, SonyBMG, I-play, Ford, Adidas and Mastercard) in order to break even (let’s assume the operating costs are absorbed in the margin on actual cost per voice minute and SMS, which should be somewhere around 40%). On 6 messages per day, this equals 15.6p (c. US$ 0.31) required ad revenue per message in order to make good for that (operating costs aside), the equivalent of a CPM of a hefty US$ 310 (compared to a market average of US$ 25-40). With the chronically cash-deprived user base that they are targeting, one can probably well assume that most users will in fact use their allowance in full.

So how do the economics work? And do they work at all? According to fellow blogger Jan-Michael Hess from Mobiliser.org the reason Blyk claims to justify this very high CPM is there apparently very high click-through rate (CTR) of 29% on average (anywhere between X and 43%). But can this be sustained? One cannot force users to click through. If each user gets 180 messages per month, how likely are they to act on an average of 2 per day? Not very, I’d say… This means that they are more likely to having to come down on their CPM. And this is where the fact that they apparently managed to nearly triple their advertiser-base is interesting: did they do so on their original CPM? Or did they have to drop it? Alas, the report doesn’t reveal this crucial bit of information…

CPM is key to Blyk’s business model and I would consider it highly unlikely that it will be able to command such a premium to the market, also as 30,000 users aren’t the world. Youth may be the killer target market that can create or make or kill new brands and it is therefore very interesting to advertisers. But, as has been pointed out, this particular target market is also fickle: free offers are loved but connection via community and brand means that users want to get in touch any way possible. More often that not mobile youth have several mobile prepaid cards all with special offers and bundled rates. They are tech-savvy and will often know where and how to get the free or cheap voice calls they need when they need them (to which I, the father of a near-13-year-old boy, can already testify).

My preliminary verdict is therefore: not very likely to succeed.