Talk:Strategy for Information Markets/Cellular phone advertising

Getting started
Make sure to merge the material on the main page and the chapter page so there's not duplication in two places.

This is potentially very interesting, but needs to be handled carefully because it's also very specific. Largely what "carefully" means is that claims need to be attributed to good sources, so anything saying there's great excitement about cell phone advertising or that it's expected to grow or costs are low, etc. needs to be attributed to someone who can be trusted. I know nothing about this field, so my suggestions right now are limited to my own speculations.
 * Text messages can be expensive. Are advertisers getting special deals with carriers to get cheap text messages?
 * In many environments, users try to avoid advertisements, and I would expect this to be greater in cell phones. How will this be handled?
 * Cell phone advertising has the potential to be much more personalized than many other forms. Will this be used and how?
 * You mention smart phone applications versus text messaging. This is a good distinction to make, and you could go either of two ways with this it. You could decide to focus on just one of the two, or you could spend more time discussing pros and cons of each or when one is more appropriate. TDang (talk) 12:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

ECON 452 first midterm class reviews
Please put your reviews for the class assignment here. you may make your review into a sub-section of this section, or just a paragraph. Make sure the reader can identify your review, and make sure to include your signature. TDang (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Want to get more information about trending Mobile Phone in NewZealand, There are amazing features added in trending cell phones Benjonas9385 (discuss • contribs) 11:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Review
When I was reading the segment the one big thing that kept sticking out for me was the lack of proper punctuation use (commas, periods, etc.) and the overall formation of the sentences felt choppy. When I read the sentences I got the jest of what the author was trying to say but it didn’t flow as easily as I would have liked. A minor thing I know, but it would help other readers to better understand what the author is trying to say if the author used proper punctuation and made the sentences flowed better. Aside from that, I think that the goal of the piece was clear and the author did a good job of conveying that to the reader. I would like to see more about maybe the companies that create the apps and the thought process that goes into figuring out what kind of apps to make, like how to they find a target market or if they maybe just make one. The author compares the “app boom” to the .Com boom that was experienced in the 90’s, I’m wondering if the author thinks that there will be a “app bust” following the boom like there was .Com bust following the .Com boom. I’m wondering if the author could potentially find maybe a graph or some statistics that show the growing trend of apps and cell phone marketing. I think that would be interesting to see, the massive boost cell phone advertising has made in such a short period of time showing graphically or through stats. I don’t think this section really needs pictures, if any maybe just like an example of a cell phone advertisement on a phone. As far as the second sub-section goes, I would like to learn more about how cell phone spam occurs, like how do these spam people get a hold of the cell phone numbers, who is the supplier. I think that would be interesting. Also, how to prevent spam would be interesting to find out. On a computer your email site automatically separates out junk/spam, and what isn’t caught can be flagged by the user and separated in the future, I’m curios how a cell phone company would do that. It would kind of cool if the author could maybe discuss which cell phone company uses CDMA, TDMA, and GSM. Overall I would say that the author is on the right track with this section. The author has references so that is good. As previously stated, my biggest issue with the writing is the choppiness of the sentences and the lack of proper punctuation use.

Liquid brown (talk) 23:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Part 2

 * Primarily and most critically, grammatical errors are widespread throughout the page, most of which are silly and can be moreover corrected upon a second or third glance. My advice as far as this is concerned is to quite frankly take the time to meticulously write the passages and once finished, meticulously review for mistakes.
 * Secondly, I would refrain from using terms like "my" and "I." We know this is Wikibooks and thus normal individuals like me and you are writing these pages but it does not need to be displayed explicitly in the writing. Language is a lot more professional this way.
 * I saw many references to class concepts like externalities and network sided-ness, but to the average person not in our course, what does that mean? I advise to maybe take the time to actually state the meaning of some of these terms so that what you are talking about can be clearer to the individual not in ECON 452 at the University of Arizona.
 * A strong point is definitely your mention of cell phone securities. I agree and feel as though if an electronic and internet barring network is going be able to expand in the direction of continued prosperity then security measures are definitely imperative. This section is significant and can provide for excellent incite for as long as it is expanded upon further.

70.171.214.143 (talk) 06:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)Awdsawds

Review
The writer was a little vague introducing cell phone advertising. There were very few grammatical errors but overall the point is clear "The ability for the customer to interact directly with the advertisement."

Facts are distributed without any flow to them. It would be an easier to read if the writer explained further about their facts like why does each side of the network benefit from each other growing..I really like the Chase bank app example. The writer should also provide just a little more factual descriptions about the .com boom. Are cell phone advertisements just as effective for non smart phone users? When you talk about "advertisers say" tell us exactly who you are talking about. Reevaluate your grammar because it is consistently getting worse throughout this passage.

The final paragraph is very detailed and provides a clear problem with a solution.

Pheagles (talk) 23:27, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Review
When first looking at the page without even beginning to read the article looks cluttered and disorganized which is a slight turn off to reading the entire article. Large paragraphs without distinction or important keywords make the article seem uninteresting at first glance. Grammatical errors are all over. The first topic on cell phone advertising is interesting and I think that different stories, scenarios, or examples of companies that are already utilizing this marketing scheme should be brought to light with the proper use of sources and citations. The second section on the characteristics of Cell phone advertising needs more structure or a better design to introduce the main points. I like the information shared in the second major paragraph of the second section. It is interesting and insightful with a connection to reality or present day applications of the technology. Direct sources are also needed in this section as well.

Thus far the third section has the best layout in the article; the bullets make the information easier to follow and the look is better organized overall. This section has proper use of citations and enough concrete details to make this section of the article official looking. I believe that this is the proper amount of information on these subjects and that it does not go into soporific amounts of detail about the subject.Riorugby99 (talk) 17:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Review
Overall I thought the article gave some good information about the topic, it just was not exactly easy to read. A couple of sentences could be re-written and there are a few spelling errors. The article is interesting but I got lost half way through it, so maybe split it up a little bit so that the information will be more easily understood. The word advertisors is used a lot also and the article would gain a lot just from clarification of who these "advertisers" are. With just a little bit more research and fixing a couple of spelling and writing errors here and there I think the article will be fine. *Cooldude1 (talk) 19:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

TDang review
I'm reviewing this version:
 * "Cell phone advertising is considered the next big thing, and is still a relatively untapped market with great potential. Advertisers are closely watching the mobile phone user segment." This may or may not be true, but reads like hype. I rpobably should be toned down. One way to handle it would be to attribute the excitement to someone (an industry analyst) who says things like this. It could also simply be left off.
 * Whether you have the excited words there or not, you should start with an explanation of what it is.
 * "almost zero marginal cost" - the cost needs to be handled carefully. I think I see what you're saying, but it needs careful analysis for an economics book.
 * First, keep in mind that when we talk about "marginal cost" we usually mean extra-cost-for-one-additional-unit-sold. If I'm selling shoes, and advertising via cell phones, then you're probably not talking about the marginal cost per shoe sold. If you're talking about the low additional cost for another advertisement (as I assume), that's OK, just needs to be made clear.
 * Second, how does this compare to the marginal cost per advertisement in other media? What's the cost of printing and distributing a little more newsprint with an ad on it? What's the cost of someone else listening to your radio commercial?
 * Finally, the cost to the owner of the media channel isn't the same thing as the cost to the advertiser. It might be low cost for a magazine to print and distribute your ad, but they might still charge the advertiser heavily for it. Similarly, it's possible that the carrier might charge significant rates for carrying advertisements, even if the cost to the carrier is very low.
 * These are good points which are truly unusual (not quite unique) to cell phone advertising: "the cellphone is always with us, the advertisements can get very personal, the advertisement are small, yet effective."; "The ability for the customer to interact directly with the advertisement."
 * Similar to above, statements such as "...cost is much lower if you compare with advertising on TV or newspaper" need to be justified. Cost per what? Give at least one actual example comparison so the reader can see that the cost is much lower.
 * These seem like something more was intended, but they're not connected clearly to anything else:
 * "A case study of a popular cell phone advertiser."
 * "Connects local customers in a particular area code to local restaurants."
 * "Future cell phone users: Cellphone users have been growing rapidly around the world."
 * It looks like you found an excellent reference in the Park, Shenoy, and Salvendy article. Without plagiarizing, use it for all it's worth. For instance, the distinction they make between "push" and "pull" advertising is interesting. Also, they reference a lot of case studies. If you feel you're lacking material, they've provided you a great list of other things to look at.
 * "This multi-sided network has strong network externalities" which multi-sided network? It's not clear from what's written. Do you mean smart phones? Advertising? As we discussed a bit in class, an advertising platform (such as Craigslist) could be a two-sided platform if it's clear that the target audience of the ads sees itself as benefiting from the ads. Frequently that's not the case.
 * "if the cause and effect model for advertising is true" it's not clear what that model is. If the reader needs to know, then you need to explain it. If they don't need to know, you can leave out that clause.
 * "With the ability to sell advertisements for a higher price on their applications, app makers..." This is almost a snippet, but it's very interesting, and could lead to a good section. Who controls the advertising channel? Suppose you're talking about the iPhone. Then is it Apple, AT&T, or a specific app developer who controls the advertising channel? That's potentially a very important distinction, and could lead to a lot of other material.
 * "For example, I bank at Chase..." There's two things about this anecdote:
 * It's very interesting, and the personal angle would be good for a lecture, but not so good for a book. If it belongs, it should be de-personalized.
 * I'm not clear it belongs, or if it does it belongs in a separate section. It's not clearly advertising. It's a bit like saying that the WIndows logo on my monitor at startup or the Swoosh logo on my Nike shoe are advertising. They are clearly a form of marketing, but not advertising in the classic sense. I'm not sure it doesn't belong in the book, but it needs to be re-thought a bit.
 * "We are seeing a lot of locator apps pop up, where a company such as RedBox has a free application where you can locate the nearest RedBox, browse the selection of available titles, receive special deals, etc." This is very interesting and I do think should be in your chapter, but again, should possibly be offset. That's because this is very much "pull" kind of advertising. It's advertising much like an advertisement in the classified ads would be. Rather than pushing an ad to the user which they might or might not be interested in, the RedBox app is something the user has to specifically request, install, and (maybe?) deliberately use.
 * "Texting messages can be expensive..." it's not clear exactly where this is going. Is this about the expense (or cheapness) of using texts for cell phone advertising? If so, it needs to be more clear and, as above, more specific about how the costs work for actual advertisers.
 * "Security Concerns" section--this material is good. It ideally should be integrated a bit more into the article, connected with the other material.

General comments: This is a pretty good start. I wasn't sure where this was going, and I now have somewhat of a better idea. I'm hampered a little in giving you advice because you're now more expert than me in the matter. You do need to be more concrete about costs. It's worth spending some time identifying who controls the advertising channel(s), and so can get revenue from them. Once you've identified the channels, you can think about other things. For instance, the cost to a popular magazine of printing and distributing a half-page ad is probably not very high. However, the magazines deliberately limit how much advertising they'll take, and that makes the opportunity cost high because that half-page ad would have to displace another one. Similarly, TV and radio stations limit how much air time they'll give to advertising, which means advertisers compete with each other. What's the limited resource for the cell-phone ad channel? Does targeting ads to consumers help to use that resource better? How do consumers respond to being targeted? TDang (talk) 17:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Texting prices
Include some info about the artificiality of the prices (carriers). --Panic (talk) 04:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

ECON 452 second midterm class reviews
Please put your reviews for the class assignment here. You may make your review into a sub-section of this section, or just a paragraph. Make sure the reader can identify your review, and make sure to include your signature TDang (talk) 17:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

2nd Midterm Review
There is a lot of good information about cell phones and how they advertise, also the ways they are advertised. Overall the article is very well written, easy to read and understand, but there is also room for improvement. What can be done to make this stronger would to add more examples to the section "New Ways to Reach Customers" you only have one example try and add a couple more examples of new ways they are advertising. Also in the section of "Characteristics of Cellular Phone Advertisements" I see that you listed the 3 different characteristics but really didn't describe them, it would be helpful to the reader if you described what the 3 types do and how they affect advertising. The final section "Security Concerns of Cellular Phone Advertising" was very well done in describing how it affects advertising and what it can do. Salacko (talk) 03:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Review

The information about cell phone advertisements was very informative, but could be a little bit more cohesive. The only thing I would like to see more of is the impact of the future on the cell phone industry. This group did a good job of editing and took the last feedback and took necessary actions. There could be more sub topics about examples or companies involved in cellular advertising. Overall the ideas and information was very clearly stated and is much improved from the first initial edit.

2nd Review

Very interesting topic seeing as how a huge majority of students experience this type of marketing everyday. Some specific examples should be used for the people that do not have cellular phones, or smartphones, and do not experience this advertising. Like in applications like WordFeud for Android(scrabble) every time a player makes a move an advertisement about the next popular mobile game or I even see some dating site advertisements. I like that part where it talks about how these advertisements are on a much more personal level, like the dating advertisement, targeting the college/young graduate ages that are likely to still be single to push their dating sites onto. With this type of advertising comes major privacy concerns too, the section on privacy is informative but could be expanded on. Privacy is a very large and growing concern with mobile devices and the social networking sites that advertisers are targeting now, especially when the two are combined! Overall the chapter is interesting and informative, but I think it could use some specific examples and maybe a little information on just how the advertising firms know what type of demographic they are targeting; which could tie in with privacy as well. *ArtVandelay (talk) 17:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

2nd Midterm Review
I like the inclusion of the sections on Benefits and Security Risks of cell phone advertising. The information about risks is necessary and it is one we don't really think about a majority of the time. The content about "hot" phone apps was good as well as the description of idle phone advertising. Idle phone advertising was something I never heard of until I read this, so it was informative to me.

One thing you could add to this page is the way certain live programs on TV like game shows or sports events/sportscenter ask the viewers to chime in with their own opinions by texting the word "go" to "44333" and voting on their poll. This can be a way to gauge how many people are actively watching the program and enjoying its content. In a way this can also be advertising for the cell phone companies themselves because if a poll only takes votes from Verizon wireless users and an individual doesn't have Verizon, they might consider switching for the benefit of being able to participate in such polls. That is just a suggestion that came to mind when reading this topic. If this is something that does not exactly line up with the idea you were going for, do not feel obligated to include it. Keep up the good work. - Vernon Crabtree (talk) 18:29, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

2nd Review
Interesting topic on a subject that effects most of us on a daily basis. I thought it was really good how you talked about why cell phones are going to be important going forward, and even provided some examples of different forms of advertising (texts vs apps.) I don't know how easy it would be to find this information, but I'd be interested to see if there is a difference between advertising on a companies mobile site, say m.espn.com and the regular site, espn.com. In addition, I thought the section about security concerns was necessary, but I thought it could be developed a little better. The last thing I noticed was the lack of information on how the cost these forms of advertising have, both on the companies using them, and on customers---data charges and what not. Overall, well thought out, few mistakes. RickRoll (talk) 19:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

TDang review

 * You need to be careful with writing. For instance, "With the increase of cell phone personalization, research companies have created new demographics of the same old population, hoping to efficiently raise brand awareness." The grammar and spelling here are fine, but the meaning is still unclear. Make sure that another member of your group can understand it, only be reading it, without further explanation. If they can't explain it back to you, it needs re-writing. (For this sentence I thought I understood what it was talking about with the de,mographics, but then it mentioned raising brand awareness, and I got confused.)
 * The Idle Screen Advertising bit is very interesting! It stands well as you have it. The idea you have there of segregating the target audience by its pricing scheme (negative prices, in this case) would tie in well with price discriminiation, if anyone is actually doing that. For isntance, offering some kind of digital coupons to the recipients of those ads would be a form of price discrimination. (This might not be applicable to Ford's campaign, but it's somethign worth checking on.) Other ways to segregate the advertising target audience will fit in with traditional price discrimination techniques just as different target audiences for print and broadcast media do.
 * The text clean-up is an improvement. Otherwise, and beyond the introduction re-phrasing (which is better) and the Idle Screen addition, there's not much new since the first review, and a lot of the points from the first review remain unaddressed.
 * Particularly the "hype" tone of some of the material needs to be removed, REALLY well-sourced to something showing the hype is justified, and/or attributed to someone trustworthy (an independent market analyst, maybe, but only if they're good). TDang (talk) 18:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Tabasco review Feb. 2012
Aside from the part where the article delves into multisided network stuff(which I assume we will be getting into later on), there's is not a lot that has economic relevance. This could currently be addressed by talking about whether the cell phone ad industry is competitive and the implications of that. Having knowledge on the costs of ads and the firms that buy them would also enhance the article. A case study with a firm that provides these ad services would be a great addition.

As you addressed in your review, some parts of the article could be toned down to make it sounds less like a press release for ads. The article itself is well written and does not have glaring grammatical issues. This article itself can work, it just needs to focus on more economic theory. --Tabasco (discuss • contribs) 05:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

possibly useful paper
I have only glimpsed at it, but another paper which could be useful to you, not specifically refering to cell phones, but advertising and two-sided markets is: "The Economics of Two-Sided Markets" by Marc Rysman. TDang (talk) 17:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

TDang review April 2012
I'm not doing a full review of this page, just reviewing recent changes as included here. I'll likely be more critical than complimentary, because (a) that's the way I am and (b) that's what will help improve things. Please don't take the criticism-over-compliments to mean I have a wholly negative view.

Make sure to check the all-purpose review thoughts as well.

TDang (discuss • contribs) 07:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "By using a cellular phones GPS chip which is found in most of today's smart-phones."--this is a sentence fragment.
 * " to master a platform that will effectively "--these are hype-sounding catchwords
 * "efficiently and effectively."--again, hype-sounding
 * push-pull strategy--Is this truly important? If so, it needs to be explained, if not it can be removed.
 * "devises (ipads, kindles,phones,etc.)"--watch spelling and capitalization
 * "mobile device's"--apostrophe
 * "costumer inside there Geo-fence"--spelling
 * "a customers every move"--apostrophe
 * "adopted and excepted"--accepted
 * Links- instead of doing the kind of links where you put in the whole url, like this or this, use wiki-formatted links for anything on Wikibooks or Wikipedia, like this and this.
 * Tippy-a couple thoughts
 * Is LBA best described as an information good? Any specific advertisement could be described that way, but the act of advertising is certainly different, and the entity which values the advertising is primarily the company being advertised, rather than the receiver of the advertisement.
 * The rest of that analysis isn't helpful. If you want to address the question of tippines, you need to do so with more focus. What are you talking about being tippy? A particular advertisement for Olive Garden on Broadway? Presumably you're talking about something like a particular service or protocol for delivering LBA's? What are the supply-side and demand-side economies of scale like? What's the taste for variety like? Even if you can't conclusively answer the tippiness question, you can address it with more focus, or leave this out.
 * "Many question come about when talking about LBA"--Unless these questions are addressed with more detail, they are probably best left out.
 * References
 * Wikipedia is not a good reference (I'm not sure if you're intending to use it as a reference, or just as a link for more information--the latter is OK).
 * acquisio.com is a suspect source--they are likely selling themselves.
 * "According to Greg Rose"--this is referring to the same acquisio link above, yes?
 * So, I'm afraid all of this is based on that one article, which might be promotional. Different, impartial sources are needed.