It has been some time since I first remember trying to sign The Guardian to the YOC media network, sometime in 2009. From memory at the time, 4th Screen were selling around 1 million page views per month. I have posted below the latest figures from their site**, that figure now stands at 6.2 million and generates more unique browsers and monthly page views than their iOS, Android and iOS tablet apps combined. These figures are somewhat surprising but not because their mobile internet has the biggest pull, rather that their mobile traffic has only 6 fold in 4 or so years and all their mobile channels are not generating significant page impressions.
I have always been an advocate for mobile internet and I do get and understand that having an app strategy for print and digital publishers makes perfect sense. After all, I have personally been involved in building so many for clients as such, why wouldn’t I think this. My bigger question is why is their mobile internet site and apps not generating higher levels of uniques or monthly page impressions? We know they have an award winning app and their paid for model seemed to work and made them a small profit after development costs.
But… why is their mobile internet site generating far less monthly page impressions in ratio to their applications? And… are their applications generating enough impressions in ratio to the unique users?
Generating 6.2 million page impressions from 2.5 million unique browsers can be averaged out that for every one customer visiting the site once a month is only generating 2.5 page impressions per visit. I am guessing that their customers are visiting more than once a month which would mean they are generating even less impressions per visit (just divide the impression number by the number of visits). As you can see from these states it becomes somewhat disappointing and raises some concern. Maybe I am interpreting unique browsers wrongly as unique users, but it sounds like the same thing to me.
Again applying the same principle generating 1 million page impressions from 34,000 uniques can be averaged out that for every 1 customer using the app once a month is generating about 30 impressions per visit. Like their mobile internet users the reality is they are visiting more than once a month and therefore the impressions they generate per visit are even less.
Lets look at the rest, again applying the same methodology…
45,113 monthly uniques generating 3.45 million page impressions equates to 1 customer visiting once a month generating 75 page impressions per visit.
11,000 monthly uniques are generating 1.2 million page impressions equates to 1 customer visiting once a month generating 110 page impressions per visit.
In summary, it shows that their Android app is generating a much richer experience than their other channels. Or maybe Android users are just more engaged than iOS users. We have to be careful here as their mobile internet site will have traffic from all devices but overall the statistics suggest that most of their mobile site users are less engaged than their app users.
In my experience, working with print and digital publishers it is typical for a user to generate up to 10 impressions per visit but at an absolute minimum of visiting the site or apps 2 to 3 times a week. This would mean you would have to divide those impressions (generated by the users) by approximately 12. In doing that, the numbers would suggest that only their Android app and iPad app are delivering a rich experience where the user is most engaged generating 9 to 6 impressions per visit respectively. The others fall well short of this and their mobile internet site alarmingly so.
2.5 million monthly unique browsers
6.2 million monthly page views
Users are accessing a broad range of content through m.guardian with the top five most visited sections being world news, football, sport, technology and Comment is free. Comment is free alone delivers over 250,000 page views per month – an indication that users are valuable opinion leaders.
An award winning iPhone app featuring video, live blogs and more that is available free to users in the US.
34,000 monthly unique browsers
1 million monthly page views
With steady growth in unique browsers of almost 50% over the last four months, the iPhone app is another strong performer in GNM’s mobile portfolio. What’s more, the proportion of heavy users is high at just over 50%. That, combined with a strong frequency metric for user behaviour, indicates a very loyal and engaged audience.
In addition to the regular news content, users have a strong preference for football, sport and business content.
We launched our critically acclaimed iPad app in October 2011 and since then it has been downloaded more than 500,000 times (globally). With a clean, modern design and easy navigation the Guardian iPad app is immensely readable.
45,113 monthly unique browsers
3.45 million monthly page views
Free to download and available from the Android market worldwide it contains the latest news, sport, comment, reviews, videos, podcasts and picture galleries from the Guardian website.
11,000 monthly unique browsers
1.2 million monthly page views
The app delivers a globally minded audience of opinion leaders and the most popular sections include football, Comment is free and world news.
Furthermore, over one in three are heavy users and this has steadily increased over the last few months – an indication that user loyalty and engagement is growing.
SOURCE**: Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/advertising/mobile?newsfeed=true)
My Comments on the below:
It is becoming harder and harder to differentiate between a smartphone and tablet. However, there are two distinctive behaviours that will not change. Browsing the internet ‘at home’ and ‘on the go’. There is a certain size tablet that will mainly stay at home for the internet browsing as described in the article such as an iPad or other earlier tablet devices. In parallel, the newer smaller devices such as Galaxy Note that blur the line between smartphone and tablet lean towards being a device that access information ‘on the go’ and equally ‘at home’. The key difference is they are delivering a larger visual experience ‘on the go’ and a larger enough experience to access the internet ‘at home’ that could be considered richer than traditional smartphones. Maybe we should call them internetphones
Posted By } David Moth
By the end of Q1 2012 smartphones accounted for 6.1% of site visits compared to 4.3% on tablet.
However, smartphones only maintain a greater share of website visits due to the lower penetration rate of tablets.
Adobe predicts that at its current rate of growth tablet traffic will surpass smartphone traffic within 12 months.
Within a year of its launch in Q2 2010 the iPad accounted for 1% of total website visits, reaching 4.3% of total visits by the end of 2011.
In contrast, within the first two years of the iPhone market entry, smartphones accounted for 0.4% of total website visits, taking nearly three years to reach 1% of total visits.
If this trend continues then tablets will account for more than 10% of website visits in 2014.
But Adobe’s report isn’t the first piece of research to highlight the growing popularity of tablets.
A recent survey by InMobi and Mobext found that 69% of tablet owners make a purchase on their device every month.
This highlights the fact that e-tailers need to have a tablet strategy in place.
Our comprehensive blog post, ‘tablets: the opportunity for marketers‘, has a number of tips for how advertisers should seek to target tablet users.
However, we should also be careful not to overstate the importance of tablets, as despite similar levels of engagement PCs drive disproportionately more website visits than tablets.
Adobe’s report shows across North America and Western Europe there were six times more PCs shipped than tablets in between 2009 and 2011.
Yet in Q1 2012 PCs accounted for 19 times more website visits.
The reasons for this are fairly obvious – people use PCs all day at work, and most tablet owners will also use a PC for browsing at home.
Adobe report also appears to fail to take into account the millions of PCs in existence before 2009.
Finally, the data shows that tablet users are more likely to use their device to visit certain types of websites.
For example, consumers consider tablets and PCs to be nearly interchangeable for media consumption and for repeated interactions with financial service providers.
“This suggests that consumers consider tablets to be similar to PCs for visits that are repeated, routine, involve passive consumption of content, and so on.”
However, PC conversion rates are much higher than tablet for retail and travel sites, “suggesting that consumers prefer PCs for visits involving research, comparison of alternatives, and online purchasing.”
Adobe’s Digital Index Report presents findings from an analysis of 23bn visits made to more than 325 mobile and traditional brand websites from January to March of 2010, 2011 and 2012.
Google Ventures’ partner Rich Miner made the announcement during VentureBeat’s fourth annual MobileBeat conference. (We have a separate story withmore details on the Astrid investment.) We’ll be posting more on those companies throughout the day.
After the announcement, Miner answered the question on everyone’s mind: Where’s the Android fund? Kleiner Perkins has its Apple-focused iFund, but neither Google nor venture firms have anything similar for Android startups.
“I think the time has gone by,” said Miner. “It’s now all about mobile.”
The proof is in the pudding, er, funding: Astrid and Crittercism are both mobile companies.
Miner has a front seat to watch mobile phone market growth. He became a partner of Google Ventures after Android, the mobile platforms company he co-founded, was acquired six years ago. He has over 25 years of experience growing businesses with innovative communications and interface-intensive applications. During his early years at Google, he helped lead the development of the Android platform and ecosystem. Prior to Android, Rich was a Vice President at Orange, where he led R&D activities in North America and was an original principal at Orange Ventures when it was founded.
Miner recalled his early days at Google six years ago, when Android was “treated as a separate startup.” The company was self-funded when Google picked it up.
“It was Larry [Page, Google co-founder] who latched on first. He was our champion. He shared our strategic view,” said Miner. He says he was impressed that Page, his co-founder Sergey Brin and then-CEO-now-chairman Eric Schmidt understood the mobile industry. It was important for Android to have support and flexibility right from the start, and those ingredients are necessary today.
“There were skeptics about Android all the way through last year,” said Miner. “There has been a tipping point.”
That tipping point happened in the last six months, he explains. As a VC, Miner’s goal has always been to make money, and Apple’s App Store makes money. Up until last year he was recommending companies focus on iOS. Now, he says, Android is “on a rocket ship.”
Another hot topic: Where is Google going with Chrome?
Miner believes the line between Android and Chrome has been drawn: Android is for mobile, while Chrome is for desktop and laptop environments. The theme is that Google understands the open platform. Miner also believes native apps and HTML 5 both have their place. Android, however, supports both for the times you want or need to go offline.
That’s a 61% premium.
Needless to say this is a gamechanger in the mobile world, as Google moves down the stack, and is no longer just an operating system provider meaning it competes directly with Apple as well as the various other handset makers who currently use Android.
What’s more, one of the biggest arguments in favor of Apple’s continued to dominance is that without a complete end-to-end “stack”, no other platform could compete with its integrated software/hardware setup.
Bear in mind that Google has over $35 billion in cash, so this answers one question about what they’ll do with it. The company still has tons more dry poweder.
Other handset makers, like RIMM and Nokia are both up pre-market on the news as the focus obviously turns to Microsoft: Is it now forced to buy one of them? Or does Microsoft benefit because the remaining handset makers (Samsung, etc.) now turn more towards Windows?
Another angle that will be scrutinized is MMI’s patent portfolio, and how that plays out.
That’s one of the key points made by Larry Page in his post on the subject:
We recently explained how companies including Microsoft and Apple are banding together in anti-competitive patent attacks on Android. The U.S. Department of Justice had to intervene in the results of one recent patent auction to “protect competition and innovation in the open source software community” and it is currently looking into the results of the Nortel auction. Our acquisition of Motorola will increase competition by strengthening Google’s patent portfolio, which will enable us to better protect Android from anti-competitive threats from Microsoft, Appleand other companies.
Obviously lots to digest. Stay tuned with LIVE coverage all day at SAI.
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. & LIBERTYVILLE, Ill.–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Google Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG - News) and Motorola Mobility Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:MMI - News) today announced that they have entered into a definitive agreement under which Google will acquire Motorola Mobility for $40.00 per share in cash, or a total of about $12.5 billion, a premium of 63% to the closing price of Motorola Mobility shares on Friday, August 12, 2011. The transaction was unanimously approved by the boards of directors of both companies.
The acquisition of Motorola Mobility, a dedicated Android partner, will enable Google to supercharge the Android ecosystem and will enhance competition in mobile computing. Motorola Mobility will remain a licensee of Android and Android will remain open. Google will run Motorola Mobility as a separate business.
Larry Page, CEO of Google, said, “Motorola Mobility’s total commitment to Android has created a natural fit for our two companies. Together, we will create amazing user experiences that supercharge the entire Android ecosystem for the benefit of consumers, partners and developers. I look forward to welcoming Motorolans to our family of Googlers.”
Sanjay Jha, CEO of Motorola Mobility, said, “This transaction offers significant value for Motorola Mobility’s stockholders and provides compelling new opportunities for our employees, customers, and partners around the world. We have shared a productive partnership with Google to advance the Android platform, and now through this combination we will be able to do even more to innovate and deliver outstanding mobility solutions across our mobile devices and home businesses.”
Andy Rubin, Senior Vice President of Mobile at Google, said, “We expect that this combination will enable us to break new ground for the Android ecosystem. However, our vision for Android is unchanged and Google remains firmly committed to Android as an open platform and a vibrant open source community. We will continue to work with all of our valued Android partners to develop and distribute innovative Android-powered devices.”
The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including the receipt of regulatory approvals in the US, the European Union and other jurisdictions, and the approval of Motorola Mobility’s stockholders. The transaction is expected to close by the end of 2011 or early 2012.
Google and Motorola Mobility will hold a conference call with financial analysts to discuss this announcement today at 8:30am ET. The toll-free dial-in number for the call is 877-616-4476 (conference ID: 92149124). The call will also be webcast live at http://investor.shareholder.com/media/eventdetail.cfm?eventid=101369&CompanyID=ABEA-3VZHGF&e=1&mediaKey=A21887C59EBAAC12F1BCF4D43C080953. The webcast version of the conference call will be available through the same link following the conference call.
Since its launch in November 2007, Android has not only dramatically increased consumer choice but also improved the entire mobile experience for users. Today, more than 150 million Android devices have been activated worldwide—with over 550,000 devices now lit up every day—through a network of about 39 manufacturers and 231 carriers in 123 countries. Given Android’s phenomenal success, we are always looking for new ways to supercharge the Android ecosystem. That is why I am so excited today to announce that we have agreed to acquire Motorola.
Motorola has a history of over 80 years of innovation in communications technology and products, and in the development of intellectual property, which have helped drive the remarkable revolution in mobile computing we are all enjoying today. Its many industry milestones include the introduction of the world’s first portable cell phone nearly 30 years ago, and the StarTAC—the smallest and lightest phone on earth at time of launch. In 2007, Motorola was a founding member of the Open Handset Alliance that worked to make Android the first truly open and comprehensive platform for mobile devices. I have loved my Motorola phones from the StarTAC era up to the current DROIDs.
In 2008, Motorola bet big on Android as the sole operating system across all of its smartphone devices. It was a smart bet and we’re thrilled at the success they’ve achieved so far. We believe that their mobile business is on an upward trajectory and poised for explosive growth.
Motorola is also a market leader in the home devices and video solutions business. With the transition to Internet Protocol, we are excited to work together with Motorola and the industry to support our partners and cooperate with them to accelerate innovation in this space.
Motorola’s total commitment to Android in mobile devices is one of many reasons that there is a natural fit between our two companies. Together, we will create amazing user experiences that supercharge the entire Android ecosystem for the benefit of consumers, partners and developers everywhere.
This acquisition will not change our commitment to run Android as an open platform. Motorola will remain a licensee of Android and Android will remain open. We will run Motorola as a separate business. Many hardware partners have contributed to Android’s success and we look forward to continuing to work with all of them to deliver outstanding user experiences.
We recently explained how companies including Microsoft and Apple are banding together in anti-competitive patent attacks on Android. The U.S. Department of Justice had to intervene in the results of one recent patent auction to “protect competition and innovation in the open source software community” and it is currently looking into the results of the Nortel auction. Our acquisition of Motorola will increase competition by strengthening Google’s patent portfolio, which will enable us to better protect Android from anti-competitive threats from Microsoft, Apple and other companies.
The combination of Google and Motorola will not only supercharge Android, but will also enhance competition and offer consumers accelerating innovation, greater choice, and wonderful user experiences. I am confident that these great experiences will create huge value for shareholders.
I look forward to welcoming Motorolans to our family of Googlers.
Posted by Larry Page, CEO
Posted By ] Maggie Shiels Technology reporter, BBC News, Silicon Valley
Google is set to introduce a mobile payments platform that will turn its Android smartphones into a digital wallet.
At an event in New York on Thursday, the tech giant is expected to show off the technology called near field communication or NFC.
The technology allows devices to ‘talk’ to one another wirelessly.
Consumers wave their phones in front of a reader at a checkout to pay for a purchase or to receive special offers.
The Wall Street Journal has reported that the programme will initially be launched in New York and San Francisco before being extended more widely across the US.
Retailers who are said to be taking part include deparment store Macy’s, American Eagle Outfitters and Subway fast-food chain.
While Google has made no comment on the reports, it has sent out invites to the press asking them to attend an event at its New York offices where it will show off its “latest innovations”.
Mobile network operator Sprint is also expected to take part.
“Phones, as we know, are used as banks in many poorer parts of the world—and modern technology means that their use as financial tools can go much further than that,” said Mr Schmidt.
Research firm Forrester has said it expects 40-50 million NFC equipped phones to be sold in 2011.
Apple is reportedly planning to include the technology in its upcoming iPhone 5 which is expected to be unveiled at its developer conference next month.
Samsung and Visa have said they will facilitate mobile payments via NFC on smartphones during the summer Olympics in London next year.
“Google’s Nexus S device that it recently announced is the first Android powered device supporting NFC and we expect NFC is going to increasingly become a default feature of every smartphone that is sold over the next couple of years,” Charles Govlin, principal analysts at Forrester told BBC News.
Market researcher Gartner said with the total value of mobile transactions reaching $245 billion in 2014, demand for mobile wallet services will be huge.
But not everyone is convinced that contactless payments using a phone will replace cash.
“In my view, while I think it is clear that potentially these phone-based transactions will be widespread, it will happen slowly. One reason being that consumer behaviour changes very slowly,” said Mr Govlin.
“The big beneficiary here will be Google, a company that is all about information. The metadata involved in such transactions could allow Google to serve ads and make you a more valuable target for advertisers,” he added.
Last week the first NFC service was announced in the United Kingdom involving Orange and Barclaycard.
Mobile wallet services have been available in Japan for a number of years.
Watch: Rory Cellan-Jones demonstrates how it can work, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13540466
posted By ] Lawrence Latif
Vodafone made the bold statement after funding a report that was co-authored by itself and the World Wide Web Foundation, which said that in emerging markets, such as India, mobile phones will become the primary devices to access the internet. The report also claimed that social notworking websites will be used to deliver local content to users.
Deployment of fibre optic networks, according to Vodafone, is a significant investment that is “unsustainable given the cost of deployment in rural areas“. Since Vodafone flogs wireless data services, there’s no surprise that the firm said greater emphasis should be placed on increasing content which in turn will cause demand for data services to increase and result in “increasing business opportunities”.
Vodafone’s survey looked at three Indian states to compare the feasibility of installing fibre compared to wireless networks. Its investigation found that installing fibre would be commercially viable in only three per cent of the districts whereas wireless networks were commercially viable in 98 per cent of the districts.
With Ofcom preparing for UK’s ’4G’ auction next year, Vodafone made an early bid to try to grease the wheels by applying pressure on regulators to make it easier for telecoms operators to get into the 4G game. It said, “Regulators should focus on consumer welfare when making spectrum available for service providers as the availability of spectrum will drive technology innovations and better coverage for the growing demand for mobile broadband services. Tapping spectrum as a source of short-term government revenue costs the economy billions more in lost economic value.”
It has long been known that high bandwidth wireless technologies such as WiMax would significantly lower the cost of delivering internet access in rural areas and in developing nations. However as Vodafone’s report points out, mobile operators have been bitten once already by bidding insane amounts of money to obtain 3G licenses and now they want to ensure that whatever money they do spend, they can recoup.
Vodafone’s report was never going to suggest increasing prices or lowering data usage caps, instead it did something more subversive, recommend governments promote greater dependence on data intensive web services.
It all makes you wonder who’s scratching who’s back.
My Comments on the below:
I am a bit late finding this article but there you go. I find the stats really interesting. Despite the fact they offer shoes for all, I am guessing here that their main user base is made up of Women. I can instantly relate to their experience. If I look at my partner who since purchasing her an android phone (6 months ago), who by the way is a kind of techno-phoebe, has moved from a 0 to a 10 user of the mobile internet (0 being not at all and 10 being everyday more than once). However, despite this amazing change of her use of phones not once has she been bothered by apps. This is not because she is not aware or has not tried them but she is used to searching for content when she wants. She finds it easy. She already knows which sites she has interest in and what sites she would buy clothes/shoes and whatever other flavour. It is interesting as her peers also share the same thought process, yet their male counterparts and very engrossed into both mobile internet & apps. In fact the more I think about it especially apps that help them not have to think for themselves or games of course! Anyhow, before I digress, this supports the experience shoes.com has described. As women, being the main demographic (again this is an assumption) of shoes.com, they are comfortable and familiar with SEARCH (and aren’t we all, no matter our gender) hence making more purchases via the mobile site than apps. Therefore, as long as the e-commerce site is mobile optimised and the URL re-directs are in place then their customers will happily discover and purchase via the mobile internet site (as we in the industry call m-commerce, a transaction made via the mobile device).
In the early adoption days of mobile internet we saw that many publisher, media owners and e-commerce sites were receiving anywhere up to 5% of their users online coming from a mobile device. Whilst with one hand this was positive news, with the other it was bad. As the sites that were not optimised for mobile you can start to work out the potential loss of revenues and/or damage to the brand/media owner by delivering a poor user experience and/or no real payment flow. Traditional publishers and media owners quickly woke up when they saw these stats. However, the retail industry was very slow to react. It wasn’t until Steve Jobs created the iPhone and apps that they retail sector started to take the space semi-seriously. It is great to see now how retailers or e-commerce sites are starting to understand and experience this space better and as the article suggests ‘not just jumping on the app-bandwagon’.
Posted By ] Rimma Kats
SAN FRANCISCO – A Brown Shoes Co. exec at the Mobile Shopping Summit said that 85 percent of mobile purchases come from the shoes.com mobile site and not its applications, proving that retailers should focus on having a Web presence before jumping on the app bandwagon.
Panelists during the “Mobile Roadmap Part I: Key Evaluation Criteria For Developing Your Initial Mobile Platform – The Keys To Mobile Merchandizing” session discussed the challenges and success their companies face with mobile. The panel was moderated by Marci Troutman, CEO of Sitminis, Atlanta.
“We had a strong ecommerce platform,” said Pete Hogan, vice president of ecommerce at Brown Shoe Co., St. Louis. “We were seeing a lot of agencies contact us about mobile and there were few players in the game two years ago.
“Eighty-five percent of our mobile sales come from the mobile Web and not apps,” he said.
Future of mobile
According to Mr. Hogan, the company’s long-term mobile strategy will involve the use of HTML5 to provide a richer experience to consumers on their mobile devices.
For companies that are looking to develop mobile sites or apps, it is important to keep the consumer in mind and try to make the overall mobile commerce experience as seamless as possible.
“Think about your business and how many times people touch your business,” Mr. Hogan said. “If you’re Starbucks then it’s daily, if you’re McDonalds it’s weekly.
“If our customer is a registered customer, we wanted to make sure we auto filled their shipping information,” he said. “That’s where you help them save time.”
A majority of consumers who download applications to their mobile devices do not use most of them.
A mobile site is an ideal tool to capture that consumer at the point-of-sale, per the panelists.
However, companies wanting to enter the application space should make sure that their apps provide a different experience than the mobile site. A lot of the time, mobile apps are geared towards loyalists, pushing deals and alerts to them daily.
There needs to be an incentive for consumers to click on that app icon when they want to shop instead of going to the company’s mobile site.
The mobile site, on the other hand, is an access point for existing and potential customers and should be treated with that in mind.
Brown Shoe first developed a mobile site and then an iPhone application.
Currently, the company has three iPhone applications, three mobile-optimized sites and three Android apps.
According to Mr. Hogan, the company’s mobile site mimics its ecommerce site and now features personalized recommendations and ratings.
“We tried to add most of the bells and whistles,” Mr. Hogan said. “However, there are still a few missing things.
“Tracking is also important – we can see when customers are coming to our mobile properties,” he said. “The ROI is trackable.”
Dale Monson, senior vice president of operations at The Sportsman’s Guide, said that the company is currently working on a second version of its mobile site.
Although the company has a mobile presence, Mr. Monson said that it has not invested in marketing efforts to promote its applications.
“When we launched our iPhone app, we wanted to make sure we were in the market,” Mr. Monson said. “The main challenge we had was a lot of items on our Web site and it’s difficult to push that into the mobile and have consumers shop easily.
“However, we have not had a good marketing program yet to push the downloads,” he said. “We have not invested in marketing efforts for our apps.”