Velti Announces Huge $27M Mobile Marketing Deal

Mobile advertising platform/exchange Velti announced this morning that it closed a two-year $27 million US mobile marketing deal. The client company was unnamed in the announcement; however Velti characterized it as "a major US brand." Velti also described the deal as the "largest ever mobile marketing deal."

Velti said that the focus of the mystery marketer's mobile efforts would be engagement and loyalty: "This program will drive increased engagement with and long-term loyalty of the brands existing customers." It will be interesting to see what sort of "mobile marketing" is involved and how much "advertising" or mobile media buying is actually part of this deal.

Velti's Q2 global revenues were $58.7 million. The US market is generating a majority of Velti's revenues and this deal would make the mystery company one of Velti's largest clients. Indeed, the announcement was aimed primarily at financial markets. And Velti got a roughly 10% "pop" as a result. 

Mobile CPMs are mostly lower than desktop CPM rates (Facebook is one of several exceptions), although they were much higher a few years ago. The chart above shows "eCPM" figures received by publishers by content category. Education leads with$0.97, up from $0.82 in July. 

Notwithstanding the huge deal announced by Velti, most marketers are still undervaluing mobile today. There's also an oversupply of mobile display inventory: more ad impressions than advertiser demand currently.

HP: We Need to Get Back into the Mobile Business -- Oy!

If you want to see a case study in poor management at a major company look no farther than Hewlett Packard. Once an exemplar of high-quality corporate culture and employee satisfaction the company is a mess. The catalog of mistakes is long. Among them the purchase, fumbling and effective shuttering of the PalmOS.

Late last week current HP CEO Meg Whitman said that the company has to get into the smartphone business -- or more precisely back into it -- because that's where the growth is in the computing market. 

If you recall, HP bought the PalmOS for $1.2 billion under former CEO Mark Hurd who was pushed out for falsifying expense reports among other ethics violations. Hurd had big plans for PalmOS but his ouster scuttled them. 

When the acquisition was announced in April, 2010 I wrote the following: 

It's a good outcome because HP needs to have a mobile strategy and it gives Palm and the WebOS a way to continue. Chief HP rival Dell is very clear on the critical role of mobile and portable Internet devices in its future and is rolling out numerous Android and WinMo handsets later this year. 

Lenovo was also taking a look at Palm and will itself be moving more aggressively into mobile. 

Given HP's financial clout and resources WebOS could emerge as a reasonably strong competitor -- perhaps most directly to RIM -- in the coming months and years, especially with new form factors. And that probably includes a WebOS-based tablet.

Obviously none of that happened. As a kind of salvage maneuver, HP decided to open-source WebOS but hasn't done a very good job of rolling that out. 

Had the Palm assets been better managed HP might have a viable smartphone right now and/or be offering a open-source alternative to Android. But those outcomes would have taken vision and execution, neither of which HP seems to have. 

It's quite unlikely that HP can make an Android phone that will effectively compete against Samsung and HTC. It might be able to make Android tablets but it won't be able to make them very profitably given the price competition now in the market. So while there's plenty of growth in mobile (smartphones, tablets) it's unlikely to be an area of strength or profit for HP. 

iPhone 5 Aftermath: the Biggest Loser Is NFC

Even though Nokia's Windows Phone 8 handsets and all the new Android devices feature NFC capability, its absence from the iPhone 5 deprives the technology "a mainstreaming opportunity" in the immediate future. Unlike any other company in the mobile industry Apple has the ability to popularize and educate consumers about new technologies.

A case-in-point is Siri. Speech recognition and "voice search" long-predated the iPhone 4S; however Siri was able to popularize them in ways that even Google and Microsoft could not. That would also have been true of near-field communications had the iPhone 5 incorporated it. 

Apple's Passbook software/app is a mobile wallet, which will enable transactions (i.e., Starbucks stored value card). However it won't be a full-blown mobile wallet that stores a credit card an enables contactless payments. That could come with the iPhone 5S or "5N" (for NFC). 

Obviously "the industry" will be moving forward with NFC rollout plans: Project Oscar in Europe, ISIS and Google Wallet in the US and so on. However consumers still need to be educated about the use cases and benefits of the technology. In some isolated situations they are or have been but for the most part -- certainly this is true in the US -- they remain ignorant of the technology itself let alone what it can do for them. 

On the broader subject of mobile wallets and mobile payments (NFC is only one flavor) most US consumers have little or no interest today: 

Source: Opus Research (August, 2012), n=1,501

In the US market at least there's a double challenge: sell consumers on the benefits of mobile payments, which Apple can and will help do with Passbook and other third party apps, and sell them specifically on contactless, NFC-enabled payments. 

First Reactions to iPhone 5: 'Gets the Job Done'

Much like President Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention, the iPhone 5 announcement today "did what it had to do." It had to deliver a 4G capability as well as a larger screen. It did both, with a 4-inch display as opposed to the current 3.5-inch display.

In addition it offers a slightly longer battery life, a better camera and it's thinner. It also uses a new chip for better performance overall. It has enhanced audio and a smaller dock connector. It doesn't include NFC. While NFC wasn't widely expected it's still a major disappointment to the industry given Apple's ability to elevate new technologies and educate consumers about them. 

The handset is the same width but taller than the iPhone 4S, which might make it aesthetically awkward. I haven't seen one in person yet. On a personal note, I would have liked to see hardware that was more of a departure from the 4S but I suppose that will have to wait. 

The 3GS has been discontinued. The iPhone 4 now becomes free with a two-year carrier contract. The 4S drops to $99 and the 5 costs $199 for the entry level model (which is what most people buy). In the US it's available from Sprint, AT&T and Verizon. 

This phone will probably sell well -- just how well remains to be seen. Pre-orders start on Friday with delivery on September 21.

As many of the pundits remarked after Obama's speech last week, it wasn't entirely inspiring but it "gets the job done." The same can be said for the iPhone 5. 

If you're interested in more detailed coverage there's much much more, about every aspect of today's announcement, on Techmeme. 

As World Awaits iPhone 5 Google Reminds Everyone It's the Market Leader

Apple's rivals have been trying to get out in front of the iPhone 5 and the announcement today. Nokia held its Lumia/Windows Phone 8 event last week. Motorola (Google) announced a number of new Android handsets and, of course, Amazon had its big Kindle Fire press conference last week as well. All of these anticipated the iPhone 5 announcement today and tried to preempt it to some degree.

Last night Google's Hugo Barra casually posted some stats on his Google+ page: "Today is a big day for Android... 500 million devices activated globally, and over 1.3 million added every single day."

Android is the dominant smartphone platform in the world -- in case you forgot. And Google wanted to get that stat out there and inserted into the blizzard of articles that will be published today about Apple and the iPhone: " . . . but Android is the market leader with 500 million devices activated globally." 

The iPhone 5, as I said on my personal blog Screenwerk," is a critical release for Apple because Android phones have caught up or in some cases surpassed the device (i.e., LTE support, NFC). The new iPhone today must offer a larger screen and LTE support at a minimum to maintain consumer interest. 

An unintended leak on the Apple site indicates that there will in fact be LTE support. We'll see what else in less than a half hour.  

Does the New YouTube iOS App Foretell a New Google Maps App?

Google introduced a new YouTube app for the iPhone today, ahead of the release of iOS 6 which removes YouTube from the group of pre-installed apps on the device. There are a number of feature improvements over the current built-in YouTube app.

Depending on your perspective, one of those "improvements" will be pre-roll ads. The current YouTube app didn't feature any advertising, thus depriving Google of a potentially significant mobile ad revenue stream. The new app will have ads and pre-roll.

Here are some screenshots of the new YouTube app: 

 Below is a side-by-side comparison of the current and new YouTube apps for the iPhone:

The new app is nice and a bit simpler visually. But what's more interesting is what it suggests about another potential Google app for the iPhone: Maps. The question is whether (or more likely when) Google will introduce a more complete mapping app for iOS.

Just as it does with the pre-installed YouTube app, Apple iOS 6 will remove Google completely from mapping on the iPhone, replacing it with Apple's new mapping application. That could mean a potentially significant loss of local query volume for Google -- unless the company dramatically improves its HTML5 mapping experience and/or releases a new iOS Google Maps app. 

There's a small possibility that if Google were to submit a new Maps app to Cupertino it might get blocked as trying to replace a core feature of the device. However there are numerous third-party mapping apps that already exist for the iPhone so I doubt it. In the event Google did submit a new iOS mapping app it would ironically mean a much better Google Maps experience for the iPhone than has been the case to date. In all probability it would also include Google Navigation, which had been missing or withheld from maps on the iPhone. 

Google's dilemma is that it uses Maps and Navigation for Android as something of a competitive differentiator vs. the iPhone. If Google were to provide the same functionality to Apple it would potentially remove that particular incentive to buy Android devices. 

Nielsen: 58% of Teens Own Smartphones

Ahead of tomorrow's iPhone 5 launch -- perhaps they'll call it the "iPhone Cinq" -- there's lots of smartphone data flying around. Today Pew released some new demographic data about smartphone ownership (penetration higher among younger and more affluent users). And yesterday Nielsen discussed smartphone adoption among younger users:

Overall, young adults are leading the growth in smartphone ownership in the U.S., with 74 percent of 25-34 year olds now owning smartphones, up from 59 percent in July 2011. Interestingly, teenagers between 13 and 17 years old demonstrated the most dramatic increases in smartphone adoption, with the majority of American teens (58%) owning a smartphone, compared to roughly a third (36%) of teens saying they owned a smartphone just a year ago.

According to the US Census Bureau there are roughly 21 million teens in the US (according to 2008 data). Pew surveys have shown that 88% of US adults own mobile phones. Pew says that 77% of teens have mobile phones and 23% have smartphones. Nielsen is saying the overall teen smartphone number is much higher: 58% 

If 23% of US teens have smartphones that translates into roughly 4.8 million people. The Nielsen 58% figure equals roughly 12.1 million teens who own smartphones. If we average the two sets of numbers it comes out to 8.5 million teens with smartphones approximately. 

Using population data and the Pew survey figures, that would mean roughly 120 (or so) million US adults owned smartphones in the US today. Beyond this we can add 5 - 10 million more for teens. That would mean today we're looking at something like 125 to 130 million smartphones in the US. 

Millennial Media: Smartphones Now 74% of Impressions on Network

Millennial Media is out with its quarterly device barometer: Mobile Mix. The report tracks the top devices and operating system share on its network. It's based on a different methodology (share of ad impressions) vs. Nielsen or comScore, which both rely on surveys.

It's not a totally "objective" view of the marketplace. But its helpful to identify and monitor trends on a directional basis. The three big trends identified in the document are the following:

• Increasing percentage of smartphones on Millennial's network (now 74%) vs. 50%+ for the overall mobile market
• iOS growth and slight Windows Phone growth vs. other operating systems. It appears the iPhone grew at Android's expense, while Windows grew at RIM and "other's" expense
• The document also shows the growth of "connected devices" (tablets)

Here are the charts that illustrate the above: 

In the future the tablet market will be a contest between Apple, Google and Amazon. Samsung, unless it decides to price things much more aggressively, will be marginalized -- at least in the US.

Amazon's Policy Reversal on Kindle Fire Ads a Smart Move

Last week I wrote Ads to Pollute Lockscreens of Kindle Tablets:

Yesterday it was discovered that all the new Kindle tablet Fire/HD models will feature these Special-Offer ads on the lockscreen. And, according to a statement provided by Amazon to CNET, there's no way to get rid of them. This controversy undermines what was otherwise a very successful launch.

The fact that Amazon won't allow consumers to "buy out" of the ad clutter is terrible and will turn off many people (though not all). It's a horrible policy. It's also one of the factors, it now appears, that allowed Amazon to so aggressively price these devices -- and undercut iPad's pricing so significantly. 

Over the weekend, based on the outcry it appears, Amazon did the right thing and reversed itself. The company will now allow users to pay a one-time fee of $15 to opt-out of lockscreen ads and Special Offers. Amazon provided the following statement to media outlets in announcing the reversal: 

With Kindle Fire HD there will be a special offers opt-out option for $15. We know from our Kindle reader line that customers love our special offers and very few people choose to opt out. We're happy to offer customers the choice.

It's not clear at all that Amazon customers actually "love" Special Offers or whether they simply tolerate or ignore them. However the irony here is that the availability of the opt-out option will likely mean that more people will feel comfortable with the ads, knowing that they can turn them off.

Otherwise the other "option" would have been to not buy one of these devices. Amazon has taken that objection away. 

Ads to Pollute Lockscreens of Kindle Tablets

According to multiple surveys (including one recently run by Opus Research) majorities of people are happy to endure advertising in exchange for free services. Ad-supported smartphone apps, for example, are much more popular than their ad-free paid counterparts.

Yesterday Amazon introduced an aggressive new array of new Kindle tablets. The specs -- and especially the pricing -- are impressive. It turns out, however, that there's a catch: ads ("Special Offers"). 

Previously Amazon had subsidized the cost of its lowest-priced Kindle eReader with Special Offers on the lockscreen. If it turned out that you didn't like the ads, you could "buy out" of them.

Yesterday it was discovered that all the new Kindle tablet Fire/HD models will feature these Special-Offer ads on the lockscreen. And, according to a statement provided by Amazon to CNET, there's no way to get rid of them. This controversy undermines what was otherwise a very successful launch.

The fact that Amazon won't allow consumers to "buy out" of the ad clutter is terrible and will turn off many people (though not all). It's a horrible policy. It's also one of the factors, it now appears, that allowed Amazon to so aggressively price these devices -- and undercut iPad's pricing so significantly. 

Let's hope that Amazon is shamed by negative PR into allowing consumers to opt-out or buy out of receiving these ads. Alternatively let's hope that the marketplace speaks and that consumers stay away. 

Competing Narratives: Mobile Ads Outperform PC vs. Mobile Clicks Are Bogus

There are now competing mobile advertising narratives that directly contradict each other. First, there's the widely supported meme: "mobile ads perform better than PC." Accordingly, there are numerous data sources showing higher CTRs and conversions from mobile vs. PC-based advertising.

Most recently data from the xAd-Telmetrics-Nielsen “Mobile Path to Purchase” study documented very high conversion rates in several verticals -- around 50% or higher in restaurants, autos and travel as the graphic below illustrates. 

Source: xAd-Telmetrics-Nielsen (8/12), n=1,500 US adults

On the other hand there are now a few surveys or studies that argue a substantial number of mobile ad clicks are unintended. For example, in January 2011, Harris Interactive (on behalf of Pontiflex) issued survey findings arguing that nearly 50% of mobile clicks were unintended: "47% of mobile app users say they click/tap on mobile ads more often by mistake than they do on purpose." 

Earlier this week came in some ways a more startling claim, based on an analysis of 6 million mobile ad clicks across 10 mobile ad networks by app marketing company Trademob. The company argued 40% of mobile ad clicks were entirely wasted: either accidental or fraudulent. The company's methodology and conclusions are detailed in a white paper (via registration).

Source: Trademob (9/12); based on analysis of 6 million mobile ad clicks

If one assumes that the Pontiflex survey and Trademob analysis can be generalized, together they argue that nearly half of all mobile ad clicks are completely wasted or worse. Trademob doesn't really discuss the other 60% of clicks that are supposedly not accidental or fraudulent. Are those converting? Are they not wasted?

A 60% conversion rate would be dramatically better than anything happening online. I'm sure, however, the remaining 60% of clicks do not represent conversions in the Trademob study. They're simply presented as "regular" clicks, with no data about conversions. 

How is it possible to reconcile the two competing narratives and sets of data? The weight of data support the idea that mobile clicks and conversions are greater than on the PC. However that might still be reconciled with the mistaken/accidental CTR argument.

The real problem with the Trademob study, however, is that it may reinforce complacency.

Most marketers are well behind consumers when it comes to mobile adoption and usage. Some CMO reading coverage of the Trademob study might well conclude that -- just as he suspected -- mobile isn't quite "ready for prime time." That would create further delay and discourage mobile investment, resulting in lost opportunity for the company. 

There are myriad ways to control for and protect against false or accidental clicks. Advertisers can protect themselves by paying on a CPA or PPCall basis for mobile leads or conversions. But they can also do call tracking and use other methods to minimize false clicks. 

Regardless, it would be a serious mistake to take this Trademob survey as definitive or reflective of all mobile ad campaigns. 

ComScore: iPhone Now 33% of US Smartphone Market

With Android increasing its dominance around the globe, the US market seems to be something of an anomaly. Measurement firm comScore reported this morning that Apple has gained share in the US.

The iPhone now represents one out of every three smartphones in the market. Android also grew its share slightly, while Windows has continued to lose share according to comScore: 

• Google: 52.2%
• Apple: 33.4%
• RIM: 9.5%
• Microsoft: 3.6%
• Symbian: 0.8%

The firm also said that 114 million US adults own smartphones, representing just under 49% of the mobile subscriber population (using a base of 234 million). Nielsen, Pew, Flurry Analytics and others have found, however, that more than 50% of US adults own smartphones.

Flurry asserted recently that more than 70% of US adult mobile subscribers owned smartphones.

EU Clears UK Mobile Payments JV 'Project Oscar'

EU regulators have reportedly cleared the mobile payments joint venture between the three dominant UK carriers (Everything Everywhere [T-Mobile + Orange], Vodafone and O2) of competition concerns. The smallest of the UK carriers, Hutchison Whampoa-owned 3, had complained about the competitive implications of the service. 

The joint venture, called Project Oscar, was supposed to be ready in time for the Olympics. The project had been in a bit of a state of limbo pending the European Commission’s approval, which has now been "unconditionally" granted. 

In many respects Project Oscar is a mirror of the US's ISIS (AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon). Unlike ISIS, however, Oscar doesn't preclude any of the UK carriers from developing their own mobile payments systems. ISIS by contrast is intended to be a consumer brand, which will prove challenging to build, and would compete with any individual carrier payment initiatives. 

Like ISIS Oscar will use payment cards and not carrier billing. It will be accessible to third party financial institutions and retailers and is intended to work with all credit, debit and loyalty cards. Oscar will provide a payments infrastructure that can then be utizilized by the individual carriers involved (and potentially others) to create their own mobile payments services. 

Oscar and the services it spawns will also compete with Google Wallet (eventually) and PayPal, among others. 

Will Amazon Lower Prices (Again) With Kindle Fire 2?

Amazon is holding an event next Thursday to introduce a second-generation Kindle Fire as well as a new 10-inch version in all likelihood. The company is also expected to "refresh" and upgrade its lower-end Kindles as well. There's considerable speculation about all this going on right now.

I'm less interested in talking about device "specs" (the subject of most of the current discussion) than pricing. 

The current Kindle Fire succeeded -- caught fire if you will -- because of the price ($199) and the association with Amazon. Since that time the device has "sold out." In reality sales have slowed dramatically in recent months. Objectively Kindle Fire is quite a mediocre tablet for use cases other than consuming Amazon content. 

Indeed, Google's Nexus 7 emerged a couple of months ago to dramatically improve upon Kindle Fire. Nexus 7 is a much better 7-inch tablet at the same $199 price point as Kindle Fire. In a head-to-head match up there's no question of which tablet to buy: Google Nexus 7.

Apple is also expected to introduce a 7-inch iPad Mini next month, along with a new iPhone. The two launches will be separate in all likelihood. The iPad Mini should also be quite appealing to those interested in a smaller tablet. And it will probably be priced competitively (around $200ish). The 7-inch tablet category will thus become a battle between Apple, Google/ASUS and Amazon. Samsung may work its way in with new devices, however.

In terms of features and usability, it's extremely unlikely that the Kindle Fire 2.0 will trump either the Nexus 7 or the iPad Mini. Beyond Amazon's content ecosystem it's chief weapon is pricing -- perhaps its only real weapon now. And in an effort to gain some advantage vs. Google and Apple might we see Amazon lower the price of the new 7-inch Kindle Fire and introduce a cheaper 10-inch tablet (vs. iPad)? 

It's quite possible -- even probable. I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon priced the Kindle Fire 2 at $179 and offered a more expensive model with more memory. A 10-inch model might start at just under $400 (to beat the iPad 2 price). Again, price was the main driver of Kindle Fire sales. 

Amazon either breaks even or loses money on each Kindle Fire sold but then makes money on content sales and e-commerce thereafter. Accordingly it can afford to be aggressive on pricing. But it can't go much lower than it already has with Kindle Fire. 

In any case Kindle Fire 2 is going to be a much tougher sell in a more crowded and competitive market. 

Update: CNET is reporting that there won't be a 10-inch Kindle Fire to directly challenge the iPad but two 7-inch versions instead. 

Samsung, Windows Phone 8 and Tepid Consumer Demand

Whether or not responding to the recent Apple patent victory in US federal district court, Samsung has said it will be first out of the gate with a Windows Phone 8 device. The new device, announced yesterday, is called "Ativ S" and will be out before Nokia's first Windows Phone 8 handset. Indeed, Samsung will be formidable competition for Nokia with the new OS. 

Meanwhile an analyst at Bernstein Research argues that US consumers simply aren't interested in the Microsoft mobile OS: 

“Our research shows that for many years, poor sales of Windows-based phones stem from a deep and stable lack of consumer interest for the product. Despite numerous and repeated efforts of manufacturers (Nokia, but also Samsung and HTC) and Operators to develop an alternative to Android and Apple based on Windows, and despite the launch of numerous phones based on Windows with strong features, reviews and marketing support, the operating system remains cornered to less than 5% market share in smartphones.”

Currently Windows Phones' market share in the US is 3.8% according to the most recent comScore figures: 

A consumer survey conducted by Opus Research in April indicated something quite similar in terms of demand for Windows Phones:

My next mobile phone will likely be . . .

Source: Opus Research, April 2012 (n=1,504)

These responses won't necessarily translate into sales figures -- Android is obviously leading the market -- however they do indicate a level of interest or demand for the various handsets and operating systems.

Both Microsoft and Nokia have high expectations for Windows Phone 8. It's not clear what will happen if consumer demand fails to materialize. 

Time Spent with Mobile Exceeds 10% Yet MMA Calls for Only 7% of Ad Budgets

The Mobile Marketing Association has conducted a study about mobile ROI whose chief recommendation appears to be that advertisers should spend 7% of their ad budgets on mobile. Currently average spending on mobile advertising is about 1% of budgets.

That's all fine, except that time spent with mobile (if that's the guide) is already in excess of 10% of all time spent with media. Perhaps the MMA didn't want to be too aggressive and call for 10% of ad budgets. 

The following chart from Mary Meeker indicates a 1% ad spent and 10% time spent with mobile media.

The next chart is from Flurry Analytics and relies on some of the same Mary Meeker data, but also Flurry's own app analytics and other third party data. It argues that consumers now spend 23% of their media time with mobile. 

Finally ad network InMobi argues that 27% of daily consumer media time is spent with mobile -- more than TV (which is doubtful). 

Accordingly, if one accepts these data as accurate, 10% is the floor and 27% the ceiling in terms of media time spent with mobile. According to most sources mobile media time now surpasses everything else except TV (and the PC Internet in some studies).

In that context it appears that asking for 7% of ad budgets seems like a very timid request. 

Millennial: Tickets Third Most Popular M-Commerce Category

Millennial Media is out with another vertical report. Last time it was travel; this morning the ad network released a report on Entertainment. It was generated in conjunction with comScore. From my perspective, there were two pieces of interesting data in the document -- although the case studies in the report are also interesting.

One was about mobile purchase categories. The other was Millennial's "post click" campaign data for the Entertainment category. This data reflects the objectives advertisers are trying to accomplish with their campaigns. 

The report said that "convenience" was the chief motivation for buying something on a mobile device (vs. online or in-person). Roughly two-thirds (63%) of smartphone owners cited this as the rationale for m-commerce. Convenience (vs. price) is typically the major reason for buying online as well.

Between 20% and 35% of US smartphone owners have ever made a mobile purchase according to several studies released in 2011 and 2012. Paralleling the data in the chart above, digital content (books, movies, apps, music) leads m-commerce overall. However we will see a broader range of e-commerce transfer over to mobile over time. 

The problem of entering credit card information is a major barrier to mobile commerce today. Those vendors that have stored credit cards (in other words direct relationships with consumers [i.e., Amazon]) will see much more volume than those asking consumers to enter 16 digits. A majority of mobile e-commerce efforts will need to find some third party solution (e.g., working with PayPal, Amazon or solutions such as Card.io) if they want to generate sales from smartphones. Tablets are a different matter; entering credit card information is not as much of a barrier on those devices. 

The chart above reflects campaign objectives, comparing entertainment companies (including movie producers and theaters) with Millennial's overall customer base. As might be expected, driving to a video view (e.g., movie preview) is the most common campaign objective. 

Video (assuming a decent WiFi or network connection) is a very effective ad format in mobile. This is especially true for movie previews, which are regarded as content and not ads by most consumers. 

In addition to video views, the other two most common campaign objectives were: driving to a social media page/site and "m-commerce" (buying tickets). Those consumers that have movie ticket apps installed (e.g., Fandango), with a stored credit card, are going to be increasingly likely to buy tickets via smartphones over other methods. 

Smartphones Now Dominant, Growth Accelerating

In the US smartphone penetration crossed the 50% threshold earlier this year. And two new reports show that smartphone growth and dominance are accelerating.

The first is a forecast from IHS iSuppli, which projected that 54% of mobile handset shipments in 2013 would be smartphones. This would mark the first time that smartphone shipments will dominate feature phones. It wasn't supposed to happen for three more years. 

Part of the popularity of smartphones is driven by "culture," as well as the convenience and value of having a smartphone. But smartphone adoption is also being driven by price. Subsidized smartphone pricing in the US often makes the devices as cheap to buy ($49 - $99) as feature phones.  

Separately, Flurry Analytics said in a recent report that 78% of US mobile phone users now own smartphones (iOS or Android devices).

This caught my attention because this figure (78%) is obviously much larger than the Nielsen and Pew numbers that show 50%+ smartphone adoption. Pew, comScore and Nielsen extrapolate from survey samples to calculate the total number of smartphones in the US market.

I exchanged emails with Flurry seeking clarification of this 78% figure and what it represented. Flurry confirmed my interpretation was correct.

The company is saying that 78% of US adults with active mobile devices are on iOS or Android devices. Flurry says that its data are based on actual usage and its population of device owners globally is in the hundreds of millions. 

Flurry now says there are 165 million active smartphones in the US today. That compares to a PC Internet population of roughly 220 million.