Even with the funny awkwardness of our phone reliance we argue that the phone is a valuable tool and we couldn’t live without it. Yet there was a time we all lived without it, because they didn’t even exist.

Can you shop without your phone?

This reliance on the phone is an extension of both new found access to information and human resources who act as unlimited lifelines that never expire.

Pew Internet just published the results of a study that show how Americans used their phones during the 2011 holiday shopping season.

They analyzed the time before and after Christmas and discovered that more than half of people use their phones while they’re in the store. From the study:

• 38% of cell owners used their phone to call a friend while they were in a store for advice about a purchase they were considering making
• 24% of cell owners used their phone to look up reviews of a product online while they were in a store
• 25% of adult cell owners used their phones to look up the price of a product online while they were in a store, to see if they could get a better price somewhere else

Calling a friend or looking up a resource is a newly found behavior. My question is, from where is this behavior born?

• Do we need the security blanket of someone else’s opinion or an Internet price check every time we make a purchase? Does this approval decrease buyer’s remorse?
• Is this a way that couples can avoid shopping with each other? The husband can just sit at home and watch the game and the wife sends MMS pics while the husband text’s back his approval.
• Is this now a mirror image of caveat emptor, “Let the seller beware?” (In Latin: caveat venditor) Now that buyers have this knowledge and resources wherever they go, they’re proving to sellers that they can’t be swindled.

I’d be interested to know if this new “I must check my phone” behavior is actually reducing product returns and/or reducing purchasing. Or could it be doing both? How often have you been at a store, seen the product for sale, looked online and saw a cheaper price and ended up walking out and purchasing it online? The idea of doing it is always tantalizing, but I don’t know if people actually do it. Being there with the product in front of you in your hand, you’re willing to pay an additional cost to just have it right then and there.

What are your thoughts?

Creative Commons photo credit to MrWerner and Peter Hilton.

We would say “What’s the value in having a million unengaged impressions? Wouldn’t it be better to have a hundred thousand conversations?”

Well its great to hear someone else taking up that charge, I just read this great post by Jason Rosenthal, CEO of Ning, in Forbes – http://onforb.es/qcznoQ – and he completely nails it when he says that its better to have 100 intensely engaged individuals versus 100,000 likes.  He makes a few other really key points but it all centers around the notion of moving from broadcast to conversation.  I know that I have a bias with this, especially given that one of our products/apps (www.knctr.com) was really built on the notion of social conversation and entertainment, but that notwithstanding, the premise having a conversation with and not at the consumer has always been at the core of what we believe.

So what do you think, Social Depth or Social Breadth?  Drop us a note and let us know.

It was announced today, http://selnd.com/qcySJG – that Walmart, bought One Riot, those with the “Killer Social Targeting Engine” (their words not mine), to better be able to connect with customers.  They speak of the intersection of social, mobile and retail being and how this will help give consumers what they want at any time.  Coming off of the idea that Social Business is the future, this acquisition by the world’s largest retailer, makes for some really interesting thinking.  Big Brands buying out development and research shops…is this what the future of Social business looks like or is it just a case of not being focused on the core business?
Drop up a note and let us know what you think.

This means all of those DVDs and CDs you used to buy. Last year in the U.S. DVD sales dropped by 7%, while in the same period CD sales in the U.K. fell 12.4%. It’s happening all over.

UltraViolet

The media industry has been responding with announcements like the one surrounding “UltraViolet” from CES in Las Vegas this week.

It’s aims are simple: people are not buying DVDs from a retail outlets anymore, so let’s give them an online alternative to buy from that works across numerous platforms.

UltraViolet is basically a content management system from an alliance of studios and technology providers who are looking to expand digital rights for the end consumer.

It aims to enable the technology behind buying content from one channel – IE: through iTunes – yet being able to access that same content again through other channels – IE: on a Home Theatre, at no extra cost.

This idea has floated around before, yet has never been developed in such a concrete form. In this example, the consumer will first have to register each purchase with the UltraViolet online database to enable cross-channel sharing. As their slogan states, you can then “Watch Wherever”.

Concern with platforms is one of the key problems for declining artifact sales. If I buy a DVD, I’m limited. I can only watch it on a system with an optical drive. That means a home theatre or computer. But what about my mobile phone, or iPad? A digital video disc doesn’t exactly fit into those…

Plus, it’s obvious that the “artifact as visual collection” sentiment – IE: decoration for the living room – is quickly disappearing, lost to fears of being labeled as the next plastic furniture covering.

Clean and tidy is the new packed CD rack. Files stored on a media server and accessible via the cloud from any platform: the big tv, the little tv, your phone, your tablet. Take your pick.

Hollywood is also addressing it’s elephant in the room: a lot of Internet bandwidth is being taken up by people downloading torrents, and most of the torrents are video files.

Just like the music side in theory continues to test digital distribution models to save it’s slump (but can’t stop hating on Spotify in the U.S.) Hollywood needs to keep moving forward as well, although don’t expect word of an all-you-can-eat model.

That’s likely because the music folks can’t help but feeling cheated by their all-you-can-eat arrangements, and industry folks everywhere are observing. Unlimited access doesn’t allow for massive hits to push a decent year into the stratosphere like in the past.

Yet sales are also not driven when 70% of consumers who are listening to a song downloaded it illegally. So keep the innovation coming media industry, you’ve got some large “illegal” shoes to fill.

It’s one of the most common questions heard. It’s often asked as a kind of a reflex.

We find ourselves asking that “What are we doing in mobile?” question just because “it’s the thing to do.”

Mobile is hot.

Everyone has a mobile device.

We have to be in mobile.

What are we going to do in mobile?

But stop and ask yourself, why do you want to be on mobile?

11 questions to ask yourself before you choose to develop a mobile app

How will someone enjoy your service better or differently in mobile? – Is there something about the mobile experience that can heighten the value of your application? When going from the desktop to mobile, the mobile version is often a crippled version because both input and output are limited. Is that sufficient for your application? Would people want/need to have access to your/their content through your app if they were out and about?

Do you just want to be in mobile because it’s the flavor of the day? – I know others have hammered you with the question, “What are you doing in mobile?” and the peer pressure is getting to you. You just have to have something in mobile. Is that the real reason you want a mobile app?

Do you just want to be in mobile to extend the reach of your brand? – It’s understandable that you would want to be in mobile to extend the reach of your brand. How awesome would it be if people had your application on them wherever they went. You could continue the relationship with the customer when they’re away from the desktop. That would be phenomenal marketing and it would keep your customers. Once they’ve installed the application, there’s no additional cost to get them to come to your site/application. Of course you want to build a mobile app, until you start asking yourself these other questions.

Would people really want to put your app on their phone? – According to IPG Labs, average heavy mobile app users only have about ten apps installed on their phone. While people may go to an unlimited number of websites, the reality of mobile app use is actually very limited. Your app is vying for a spot on the user’s phone. Are you creating a compelling reason for the user to download, install, and use your app?

Can your brand withstand a half-assed mobile app? – Oh I know you think your mobile app is going to be awesome. But chances are version 1.0 of your mobile app is going to suck just like version 1.0 of your website sucked. You remember that pile of garbage? For most of us, the first version of our website was crappy (remember “brochureware?”), and the same has been true with mobile apps which often just look like an advertisement for the company’s website or desktop application.

At the early stages of development, when you’re making mistakes, a website is more beneficial than a highly personal and intrusive mobile application that a user elects to install and keep on their phone. If you do create a half-assed mobile app (likely at the beginning), even if it’s a short term experiment, it can do long term damage to your brand. Is it worth it?

Does your opinion of other applications decrease when they don’t have a mobile version? – While a crappy mobile app can do damage to your brand, the lack of one will probably not affect your brand at all, unless it’s critical to your application that you have a mobile component.

Do you need a mobile app or just a mobile-optimized website? – If what you’re trying to do is create a mobile app for your content site, wouldn’t it be better just to create a mobile-optimized website rather than a whole new mobile app?

Do you have access to great developer talent in mobile? – This is a critical issue. If you don’t have the access to talent you’re going to either have to hire a recruiter, spend time looking through tech job boards, cull through resumes, and conduct interviews.

Do you know how to gauge a mobile developer’s talent? – If you’ve never built a mobile app before, or haven’t spent time in that world, your ability to judge talent will be suspect and that unfortunately is going to hurt you down the line.

Are you ready to find the talent and spend the time and money to develop across multiple mobile platforms: iPhone, Android, BlackBerry, and Windows Phone? – The advantage of a web app or desktop app is you don’t have to build across multiple platforms. Even if you’re developing a desktop application, a single PC application will reach 90 percent of your audience. Not the case with mobile. If you want that kind of reach you’ll have to develop across three different application environments. And unfortunately, “build once, run everywhere” was only the promise of Java. It doesn’t work across multiple platforms and it doesn’t work even within Android with its multiple versions across multiple handsets with different functionality and different screen sizes.

Watch my interview with Lino Tadros, CEO of Falafel Software talking about developing across multiple platforms.

Are you willing to spend the money to reach the audience you want? - You need to develop across all these different platforms to get the effective reach you want, plus you’ll have to spend money marketing your application and convincing people to install it on their device.

Before you ask the “What are we doing in mobile?” question, make sure you’ve answered all these above questions first. Mobile is not just the flavor of the day, it’s a major business decision that has new costs and risks associated with it just like anything else.

Creative Commons photo attributions to Kevin Lim (inju), Robert Occhialini (bump), Judy Breck, marcopako.

Are we living in a topsy turvy world? Carriers are willingly allowing applications go after their core revenue model (phone minutes) or eat up their bandwidth (streaming video). For years, in the age of the “anybody can do anything” Internet, carriers have done an excellent job controlling their network: what goes on it, how people use it, and how they charge for it. With the proliferation of smart phones with direct Internet access that can use VoIP services, access to calling plans that undermines the carriers’ pricing (even free) is just an application download away.

In an app-enabled mobile world how long can carriers hold onto their old pricing mechanism for consumers? They can only block Google Voice and Skype for so long. You remember the old adage, the customer is always right? Well, in this new mobile world, the customer is calling the shots. And if you want to keep them, you better revise your revenue model.

Who doesn’t love FREE?

While the cost of making phone calls has dropped dramatically, the wonderment of FREE phone calls still holds true. There are so many services that offer cheap-to-free calls, yet every time another one is announced it’s big news. And with BlackBerry it’s still big news because they’ve got the largest penetration of smartphone users. Much higher than the iPhone.

Free phone calls, even for a short period of time, makes an impact. When I was in Paris, Skype gave us Traveling Geeks a month of international Skype-to-phone calling for free. That was absolutely huge, and it was timed perfectly as I called my wife and parents every night from Paris. What was so powerful about that short promotion (free international calls for one month) is they gave me something that affected me personally. How often can a brand do that? Provide something ongoing or even as a promotion that attaches their brand to a personal intimate experience. Skype did it, and as a result I’m a customer for life. More importantly, I’m telling everyone about it. I’m blogging about it.

Free phone calls are powerful. What can you offer for free, continuously or for just a brief time, that could deliver that impact?

Creative Commons attribution to VoipMAN and re-ality / CC BY 2.0

Can this idea really work? Can 24 carriers along with three device manufacturers operate more smoothly than just a single device manufacturer?

My answer: Good luck.

I’m sure when the announcement was made there were cheers all around. Execs were slapping each other high five and saying to each other, “Watch out Steve Jobs.” And then as soon as everything calmed down, they all said to themselves, “Oh shit.”

Wholesale Applications Community needs to consult with a cat herder

Yes, oh shit is right. Just the technical complications alone with different devices, different networks, and different governing rules are complication enough. But if you think it’s hard to get agreement on anything within your organization of 100 people, think about 20+ worldwide organizations. I wouldn’t want to even try to get agreement on whether they’d like Coke or Diet Coke served. Years ago I worked for Sprint and I was amazed at how long every single task took. I realized I could do so many tasks quicker if I just did it myself. I hosted and produced two podcast series for Sprint (a B2C and B2B version), and was seen as just the guy who could do it all when it came to podcasting.

Do dictatorships work better than democracies in mobile?

At a much grander scale, Steve Jobs is the guy who can do it all when it comes to creating a computing and content market. He did it with Apple computers, the iPod, the iPhone, and more importantly the resulting iTunes store for movies, music, and applications. In a conversation with friend and Apple industry expert Andy Ihnatko, he said of Steve Jobs, “If Jobs says every computer gets a cup holder, then every computer gets a cup holder. He dictates the market for his computers.” This didn’t happen in the PC market, it didn’t happen in the mobile phone market, and good luck trying to get it to work.

Mobile carriers are very protective of their respective networks. They don’t operate like the free and easy Internet. Geez, just to do an SMS campaign over their networks you have to fill out a form to explain what you want to do and how long the campaign will run. That’s just text. Now the carriers are going to agree on a whole how to manage applications. Sounds great in theory, horrible in practice.

But then again another idea that sounded great in theory, horrible in practice, turned out to be great in practice. I’m talking about Wikipedia.

Can the Chinese fire drill behavior of the multiple carriers eventually come together and form something useful like Wikipedia? Check back with me in a year.

Creative Commons attribution: Star5112 / CC BY-SA 2.0

Let me show you some examples:

BlackBerry app more expensive than iPhone app

iPhone/iPod

BlackBerry

iPhone app more expensive that BlackBerry app

iPhone/iPod

BlackBerry

iPhone and BlackBerry app priced exactly the same

iPhone/iPod

BlackBerry

While both BlackBerry and iTunes have many free apps, only iTunes seems to have inventory of $.99 apps. With BlackBerry, after free, the applications cost $2.99 and up. Most wouldn’t think much between $1 and $3, but that is THREE TIMES AS MUCH.

A few top selling $.99 iPhone applications

In this sample I only looked at games, not productivity applications. When you get into that space the price varies even more widely, especially when you start comparing Windows Mobile applications which back in the day could cost hundreds of dollars on Handango. Now productivity applications have come down to a more reasonable arena of about $29, but it’s still violently more expensive than other applications. I’m just confused as to why the pricing of the mobile applications have no rhyme or reason to them. I don’t track the gaming market that closely, but I can say that when a game is released on the three major platforms (XBOX 360, PS3, Wii) it’s priced the same. So why isn’t it the same for mobile platforms?

Possible explanations for the complete inconsistency in mobile application pricing:

• Who cares? It’s usually less than $5.
• Nobody is deciding between an iPhone or a BlackBerry app. They’re deciding whether they’re going to get the app at all, so they never compare prices on other platforms.
• The cost of applications is never a deciding factor when purchasing a mobile device.
• Pricing for mobile applications is far from settled. We’re all still in a “figuring it out phase.”

Got some other explanation? Let me know.