But it's also not that I want Blyk to know more about me, or anyone for that instance; it's that not many people do enjoy adverts. Yes, there may be a big demographic that do, but I wonder in what age groups?

Long and rambling posts are good!

Samantha.

“Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don't know which half.” – John Wanamaker.

Non-Targeted advertising exits for two reasons
1) On the off chance that just at that moment you have a longing for Baked Beans.
2) To increase your awareness of the product so that in the future when faced between a choice of what to eat, you'll chose that brand of Baked Beans.

Of course, those of us that dislike adverts block them out. They're not of interest and we don't want to see them. This leaves the people who do like adverts (and there are a disturbingly large amount of them) to see the untargeted ads.

So, we're left with directly targeted ads. I know that you're a F/16/student – that's not enough to personally target you. That's enough to target your demographic. So I'd end up sending you adverts for heat magazine, fake tan and horoscopes. Not good.

Now I'm forced into trying to know everything relevant about you to build up a specific profile. If I knew which books you read, shops you visited, web sites you read, friends you met etc I'd be able to send you deals on mobile phones, books about British Politics and alchopops.
But – and here's the kicker – would you be happy with me knowing all of that about you?

So, let's look at the three main reasons for advertising existing
1) To subsidise. ITV shows are “free” because the advertisers pay for them.
2) To profit. C4 make enough money from the Big Brother phone-ins to pay for the show. The advertising gives them more profit.
3) To legitimise. As bizarre as it may seem, some people distrust the BBC because it doesn't carry advertising. Websites without advertising on them can often appear less professional than those carrying ads.
People accept advertising because they don't want to pay directly. Even though advertising increases the cost of your annual shopping basket far more than the cost of the Licence Fee – they'd still rather not pay directly.

So, you make a choice. Do you want to pay directly – or do you want to pay indirectly? If you do want to pay indirectly, how much information are you willing to sacrifice for relevance?

What a long and rambling post….

I don't like adverts, and most things can probably wait until I'm on the computer.

Then again, pretty much all my friends couldn't careless about Gordon Brown's latest cock-up. I'm a minority in that sense.

Samantha.

i work on mobile adverting for a client – each time they run an advert they get between 500 – 3000 new customers per slot – and a slot is around 3 hours. it works, bloody well.

… yes, I have over 15,000 businesses who tell me each day about the success they are having with opt-in SMS marketing – everyone from churches to chip shops to football teams to plumbers.

We have local pubs who text customers when they have a quiz night or a band… we have churches that remind people about service times…. we have pizza shops who offer 2 for 1 offers to their own local opt in customers.

So yes, if mobile marketing is done properly it is very effective – perhaps the most powerful and efficient form of marketing available…. Blyk simply have the wrong model!

Alastair
Txtlocal