Mobile carriers to test out tiny ads for tiny screens

Well, it was inevitable really, but get ready for a whole new world of phone based advertisement. Verizon and Sprint Nextel are tiptoeing around the idea of opt in video ads, with plans to test the functionality in March but fears of upsetting consumers, while ESPN is jumping into the fray with Visa, Nike, and Hilton Hotels all lined up to provide video ads to accompany their service. There is currently a code of conduct among carriers that requires you to request every advertisement that a company might want to send, but the carriers are looking into incentives, possibly rate plan discounts, for subscribers to allow targeted and location based advertisement on their phones, without all that inconvenient "asking you first" nonsense. We'd hate to owe our minutes to an infomercial when we need to make an emergency phone call, and we can't wait to see carriers try and charge for the bandwidth these vids will suck up, but we all knew it was coming sooner or later.

[Via Phone Scoop]

[Deluxe @ Jan 18th 2006 8:11AM]

I like how before there's any decent actual *content* on mobile TV, there's already ads. Nice ;).

[brian @ Jan 18th 2006 9:10AM]

No wonder Gizmondo offered up their "Smart Ads" as collateral on a bridge loan. It's now practically worthless.

[frankie @ Jan 18th 2006 9:13AM]

I dont have a problem as long as it is an opt in scheme,

[frankie @ Jan 18th 2006 9:14AM]

I dont have a problem as long as it is an opt in scheme,

[jon @ Jan 18th 2006 10:04AM]

This doesn't sound like such a bad thing, as long as the consumer still has a choice. As cell phones become a near necessity no matter who you are, anything that eases the cost burden on low-income customers is going to be welcomed. I can even see location-based advertisements as being a benefit to travelers. I hope that if something like this goes into practice, there is a way to "pull" local ads in addition to the ads that will presumably be "pushed" onto your phone, for example when I want to find someplace nice to eat in a town I'm passing through for the first time.

[Evan Brom @ Jan 18th 2006 10:08AM]

Why would they putting ads on a 3650 considering Verizon and Sprint/Nextel never offered that phone! But I would take the ads if they made my bill lower and were silent and interruptible if I needed to make a call.

[TC @ Jan 18th 2006 10:25AM]

I don't have a problem, as long as it's an opt-in scheme *AND* there are no significant penalties for not opting in. If you get a 33% discount on your monthly rental for opting in, suddenly the base price will rise so that those who've opted in are paying more or less what they were before, and everyone else is paying through the nose. See US supermarket loyalty cards for a perfect illustration of this.

[Khaytsus @ Jan 18th 2006 10:50AM]

TC,

This is why I don't shop at Kroger, although I'm sure there are other places that have "loyalty" cards as well. I'm not going to pay MORE than what I pay at Wal Mart with the Kroger "discount" card, I'll just go to Wal Mart where they stab the people they buy from in the wallet instead of the consumer.. Oh well.

[John @ Jan 18th 2006 10:57AM]

I could i sell space on the insides of my eyelids to freaked out advertisers trying to justify their existence.

[Cicily @ Jan 18th 2006 11:56AM]

Um so let me get this straight we are supposed to pay our cell phone providers to view the content which will soon be riddled with ads. I'm not paying for something which has already been paid for. I'll pay to watch what i want to watch but I wont pay to watch ads, especially knowing that the provider already got paid for carrying the ad.

[Michael @ Jan 18th 2006 11:58AM]

I hate it. They already suck you dry with their confusing plan schemes. You actually think they are going to charge less? They'll raise their rates (regardless), then let you keep paying what you did before at best.

[eMarrs @ Jan 18th 2006 12:45PM]

I think that there would be many people who wouldnt mind getting a discount on their cellphones. I cannot bring my cellphone into work, so it stays off for a good amount of time every day. I wonder if that would make a difference or not in the discount..

[MIKE @ Jan 18th 2006 2:08PM]

Uh - no. Sorry. Thats where I draw the line. "Opt-in" is a crock and "opt-out" means you get dumped into the poorest of services. Trust me.

When are people going to get it. We dont want to be bombarded with advertisements. I havent changed phones since 1999 and wont so long as it workds because a phone is a phone is a phone - I dont need to list to crap music or take fruity pictures of girls underwear while on line for lunch or have any desire to walkie-talkie ANYONE.

The Einsteins at phone companies better realize and realize it quickly that there is a growing majority of people who cant even place a traditional damn call because someone is uploading their latest photo-shoot and they're jamming their pictures down the pipe hogging all the resources.

There is NO NEED for that crap. You phone execs will find out real soon when a good 35-40% of us just STOP using cell phones PERIOD.

[Phil @ Jan 18th 2006 2:15PM]

does the 3650 count as old-skool yet? cause i'm still rockin' that shiznit, natch.

[SysOp @ Jan 19th 2006 2:47PM]

Phil the 3650 is definately old-skool... but hey i rock it... Symbian Series 60 still tastes pretty good