GigaOM has an interesting post revealing the names of some companies from a recent startup conference that are looking for money. An interesting mix, weighed towards, it seems, companies looking to present web or informational content on mobile devices, whether through RSS or other platforms. There’s a little bit of technology in there, but mostly content companies:

GigaOM » Wireless Startups Searching for VC Dollars::

Raising Money Now: 3jam, 509, a la Mobile, Arch Rock, Autonet Mobile, Azteq Mobile, Clicmobile, Emdigo, EQO Communications (though perhaps this is yesterda’s announcement), GPShopper, Intercasting Corp, Mobileplay, Mobio Networks, Nexage, Numobiq, Ortiva Wireless, Rhevision Technology, Smaato, Spark Parking, Stellaris Networks, Wichorus, and Xpressent.

Raising Money Within Six Months: Bones in Motion, FreeRange Communications, Greystripe, Snac, TalkPlus, and WeFi.

Raising Money Within One Year: Jangl, Juice Wireless (even though an exec told us a round was close to closed last December), Mobango, MobileMax, Promptu, SoonR

The fine folks at UIQ dropped me a note to share some details about their upcoming Fast Track events for developers over here in the US. They’re taking place May 10-11 in Boston, and May 14-15 in San Francisco, and are designed to provide developers and biz dev types with technical and commercial information about developing for the UIQ platform.

The intention is that developers can walk away from the events with everything they need to get started developing on UIQ 3 — technical and business guidance, a useful set of contacts, and the software and hardware to start coding immediately. Every attendee will get a UIQ Starter Kit, with all kinds of good stuff in it, including a UIQ 3 phone from Motorola or Sony Ericsson, which makes it well worth the $149 fee.

If you’re interested, visit http://developer.uiq.com/fasttrack.html for more info and to register, as spaces are limited.

Although the lines between the two webs are blurring, there still are two webs for most intents and purposes. So when I caught up with Patrick Parodi at MIP TV last week, I was interested in a stat he threw out in his role as Chairman of the MEF, as opposed to his day job, as CMO of Amobee.

Worldwide size of the mobile content market: $20 billion

Worldwide size of the internet content market: $4 billion

My first reaction, was “wow, that’s impressive”. And of course, it’s still early days for mobile content - as it is for web content for that matter. So to pronounce trends on the basis of a few scant years might be foolhardy.

Many would, however, seize this as evidence of that old industry saw that whereas people have consistently refused to pay for web based content, they’re “happy” to pay for mobile content.

I’m not so sure. I wouldn’t go so far to say the industry has peaked just yet, but I don’t think the future will be anywhere near as easy - nor as profitable as things have been in the past.

There’s a bit of an uproar going around about how Vodafone and Orange in the UK are “crippling” Nokia N95s they sell by removing the internet telephony plumbing that allows the use of integrated third-party VoIP services over the device’s Wi-Fi connection. Users can still make VoIP calls through services that have a separate client, but can’t use ones that integrate right into the phone and let users dial from the phonebook and so on.

The fuss is mainly being kicked up by Truphone, providers of the type of VoIP service that can’t run on a Vodafone or Orange N95. Its CEO told El Reg he’ll complain to British telecoms regulators, and accused the operators of contravening European laws.

I’m not quite sure what to make of the situation, and I’ve got some conflicting feelings about things, so let’s try to make some sense of it, then tell me where I’ve gone wrong (or gotten it right) in the comments.

Operators blocking this sort of thing is stupid. But if that sort of stupidity were illegal, the operators would be in jail already. It’s rather pointless to block this stuff, because all it’s going to do in the end is piss off some users. At this point, there aren’t enough people using, or even aware of, these services for any revenue loss to be a concern. Second, the people trying to use these things are savvy users who, if they can’t do something on one operator, will just churn to another — and how is that preventing “lost” revenues? Third, if people want to make cheaper calls, they’re going to do it one way or another. If it’s not VoIP, they’ll use a landline, or a calling card, or a callback service. (More along these lines from Dean Bubley.)

Truphone obviously isn’t a disinterested party. Their agenda here is pretty clear: if all compatible phones have the software required to use their service removed by operators, it’s going to make life pretty difficult for them. So, they whip up a frenzy about the big, bad operators’ anti-consumer policies, and even if they don’t get the operators to change their ways, they’ve gotten a ton of free marketing — even if this particular issue affects only a handful of users. (Keith McMahon has some more talk about Truphone and the size of its market.)

All that said, if operators want to remove the VoIP capabilities, let them. As I said above, it’s a move that will backfire in the end. But at the same time, I can understand how they’d see a company like Truphone as leeching off the subsidies they pay out on mobile devices. These companies depend on operator subsidies to get high-end devices which can access their services into the hands of potential customers cheaply — and then they want to sell a service that directly competes with the operators’ core offering. That would probably upset me, too — though my reaction wouldn’t be to try and block their services. To suggest that operators shouldn’t be allowed to determine what’s included on or left off the handsets they sell will hasten the end of operator subsidies. And as much as people love to get worked up about operators “crippling” devices, they love the cheap handsets subsidies provide even more. If they didn’t, the reaction to this sort of story would be “fine, I’ll just pay more and get the unlocked, SIM-free version.”

For me, this is an issue of disclosure. Operators and retailers should openly disclose the specs of the devices they sell. Should this mean they have to make it clear what functionality or applications they remove? I’m on the fence about that, but I think as long as they make some detailed specs listing the features the devices they sell do contain readily available, it shouldn’t be a problem. However, judging by the listing for the N95 on Vodafone’s web site, they’re not doing this. I think a useful example could be how cars are advertised and sold: manufacturers’ advertising plays up certain features, which are often options. Not every model features those options, but when you go to a dealer, it’s made very clear which features a particular car does have. Conversely, the window sticker doesn’t say “This car does NOT have…” and list all the options it doesn’t have.

I think that more transparency and better information for consumers is something that we can all get behind, but to imply that operators shouldn’t be able to change the devices they see fit is a step too far. As I said, doing so endangers subsidies — but it could also see handset vendors start selling dumbed-down handsets to all their carrier customers, leaving out features from unlocked versions as well so operators wouldn’t fall foul of “anti-crippling” laws.

Michael Mace has the bumper 70th edition of the Carnival of the Mobilists up at his Mobile Opportunity blog, so be sure and check it out to see the week’s best writing on mobile. If you missed it, last week’s was at Troy Norcross’ Mobile Marketing and Spam site.

Quantas announced this week that they are going to allow passengers to send sms during internal flights in Australia, according to 160 Characters, among others. Well, at least they’ll test it on one plane for 12 months.

This is a smart move.

Firstly, as you’re not going to be sitting next to some load mouthed Ozzie shouting at his phone “Yes Sheila, I’m on a plane” as they won’t make voice services available.

Secondly, if the myth that mobile phones do somehow cause planes to crash does prove to be correct, the effects are going to be somewhat limited. Not much compensation if you’re flying on it, but don’t worry, I’m sure it’ll be fine.

Note to self. Avoid internal Quantas flights to Oz for the next year.

Russell Beattie’s been busy since he quit blogging last year, he’s just been a little more quiet about it. However, he’s announced a new project, Mowser. It’s a combination of a transcoder (so mobile users can visit full HTML sites), a directory of mobile-friendly sites, and keywords (delivering quick access to certain sites and information — for instance, “w Las Vegas” sends you to the weather.com page for Las Vegas).

Mowser’s transcoder is a bit more stout than a lot of existing ones. For instance, if a user requests a site that uses handheld stylesheets, Mowser will display that. He’s also built in support for AdMob ads (the usual disclosure about MobHappy’s Russell Buckley working for AdMob applies here), so that if users simply include the relevant meta tag on their site, Mowser will automatically insert AdMob ads, and start generating them some revenue.

It’s cool that Mowser encourages people to build handheld style sheets, rather than just creating the impression that it can chew up their sites, spit out a mobile-friendly version and that’s that. There’s not a lot of info up on the site yet, but Russ has started a new blog for Mowser, and he’s also got a long list of features to add, so it will be worth keeping an eye on.

Update: Russ has posted a screencast that walks through Mowser’s features pretty comprehensively.

A few weeks back, I was interviewed by Cameron Reilly, on his Podcast, G’Day World. After we got through the normal mobile marketing stuff, we got a bit more eclectic and I told the story of John Newman, which I knew would be the kind of thing Cam likes - and presumably his audience.

John Newman started his life as a drunkard and “blasphemer” before surviving a terrible storm at sea and found religion. Incredibly, almost his first job *after* his conversion was Captain of a slave ship and despite the terrible suffering below decks, he saw no contradiction at the time between his faith and his profession.

Years later, he became a clergyman and actually campaigned with William Wilberforce to successfully end slavery and also penned the hymn Amazing Grace, with the words “I was blind/And now I see” - a is a clear reference to being able to see how misguided his tacit support of slavery had been.

The point of this anecdote was to ask what are we doing today that our descendants will look back on in disbelief and ask themselves how on earth we could have done that, thinking it was normal, or certainly harmless.

Cameron suggested that allowing millions of people to live in poverty and die of hunger would be high on his list for nomination and recommended I read “Bono on Bono”, which makes this point pretty convincingly. I did actually buy it, but ironically, it was immediately stolen. So I need to get hold of another copy.

Anyway, this got me thinking and talking to a few people. And the overwhelming response was that more people would do more and indeed, give more, if the funds weren’t pocketed by corrupt officials - the very compatriots of the people dying and suffering around them. This is hard to argue with as corruption does seem to be endemic and anyway, so many people believe it to be fact, that you can’t convince them otherwise, without a paradigm shift.

So, I’ve been mulling this over and as I wrote earlier today, I attended the ForumOxford Future Technologies Conference last week. Simon Cavill of Mi-Pay was demoing a product that allows migrant workers in say, the Middle East to send money securely by SMS to their families at home, where it can be cashed in or banked. This is cheaper, quicker and ironically more secure where the banking systems are corrupt, inefficient or just don’t exist.

But it got me thinking. Supposing that we could donate money to people “direct”, cutting out the middle men, Quango’s, Governments and liggers who all want their piece of the pie.

Supposing that we could send direct to those in need enough money to buy say, mosquito nets (3 million people a year die of malaria) or basic other tools or food? This would mean mean that the mobile could empower the people for whom the aid is intended and (barring a few transaction fees) would start, bit by bit, to change the world.

Sure, there’s issues to solve. But with mobile phone access exploding in the third world, Nicolas Negroponte’s One Laptop Per Child project poised to distribute hundreds of millions of machines to needy kids (meaning the same technology and principles of direct donation could be used) and even the growth of “village” phones, distribution of technology is well on its way to being cracked.

The main issue that I would see is getting the money “off” the phone to spend it, but certainly in urban areas, the infrastructure is there. 

So, if you’re one of the people who feel ambivalent about donating to these sorts of charities, would this kind of idea change your mind, if you could be sure that your money was going straight to those who need it? 

And if you’re in the mobile payments business, perhaps this is an idea you could encourage or nurture.

On Friday, I went to ForumOxford’s Future Technologies Conference in Oxford (England) as a speaker and sponsor, but also as an active member of the Forum (apparently one of the most active, which surprised me) and as a delegate, eager to learn new things and network with others in the mobile industry. It didn’t disappoint on any of these levels.

For those that don’t know, ForumOxford is run by Tomi Ahohen, the leading consultant, speaker, writer and blogger and Ajit Jaokar, who also does pretty much the same. It’s free to join and is a hotbed of discussion and debate about mobile. I sometimes cross post over there, if I think an idea is worth exploring further. So get on over there and check it out.

Back to the conference itself, here’s what Tomi wrote as a follow up:

I do want to thank personally, individually: Adrian Blair of Google, who gave us a beautiful view of what Google can contribute to the future of mobile.

Then Professor Ed Candy of Three/Hutchison who gave such a positive view of an operator who “gets it” and supports this industry.

And to thank Daniel Applequist of Vodafone whose views were well in harmony with Ed Candy’s, probably surprising many in the audience.

A wonderful presentation on the road maps of handsets from the always amazing David Wood of Symbian.

William Webb of Ofcom and his inspiring view and visions into the next 20 years of our industry.

Jeff Sonstein of Rochester Institute of Technology and his practical guidance on design for mobile applications

Vladimir Dimitroff’s beautiful lead in the debates about what is convergence and do we need it

Nick Sex and Scott Beaumont with their beautiful case study of a start up

Simon Cavil’s wonderful real time demonstration of mobile payments

And for me perhaps the most inspiring and uplifting presentation in a day of fantastic contributions, Russell Buckley’s live setup of a mobile ad campaign before our eyes.

Gee shucks, Tomi, thanks - and for once the demo Gods were with me.

In addition to that, there were a couple of interesting nuggets I gleaned that you might find of value.

Adrian of Google said that 20% of all search terms (both web and mobile web) were new/unique. If the Long Tail concept needs demonstrating, this seems to do it.

Dan of Vodafone said that 50% of Vodafone Page Views came from the LEAST popular 84% of sites (Long Tail economics again). Also check out the WC3 if it’s possible that you’re in mobile development and don’t know about it. There’s also a lot of great stuff here too at Jeff Sonstein’s site, for the techies among us.

David Wood told us that there were 25,000 Wap 1.0 sites and 80 million Wap 2.0. That would seem to be a kinda large market.

Tomi shared that 44% of mobile users in Japan click ads, which seems an amazingly high number.

Vladimir Dimitroff had the impossible task of leading a discussion on “convergence” in 10 minutes. He’ll be etching the bible and works of Shakespeare on the head of a pin as an encore. However, one point that was very thought-provoking was that convergence isn’t just about devices. For instance, customers are converging with employees. In other words, customers are now creating content and telling their friends about it (becoming sales people) and spreading the word (morphing into marketing personnel). Does that mean we need to treat customers differently, from the old passive consumption model?

Obviously, the fact that customer relationships are changing isn’t a new thought, but thinking about it in this framework is stimulating.

Finally (and I may post about this a little more), Simon Cavill’s mobile payment demo included the nugget that the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the maximum limit to transfer funds from mobile to mobile in the prevalent payment system is $1 million. The average person there earns a mere $700.

My Prediction 5 for this year was that “anyone with a contract who wants a flat rate data package by the end of 2007 will get one” in Europe. While this seemed quite bullish at the time, Mary Elizabeth Mapes Dodge’s little fictitious character seems to have taken his finger out of the dyke and the flood of all-you-can eat plans is really happening.

Peggy Anne Salz reports that Vodafone is introducing flat rate data packages, following on from T-Mobile and 3’s X Series. The story was originally reported by Alex Farber at New Media Age, but no point in clicking there, as it’s hidden behind a subscription wall. Perhaps new editor, Justin Pearse, will end this curious 20th Century practice of hiding old news, but making new news fully available.

Then we have more news from 3 (via Peggy) that 3 have introduced a GBP 5 (9.90 of your US Dollars) “unlimited” package that turns out to be restricted to 1GB a month, which doesn’t seem enough to warrant the unlimited tag. But, no matter, it’s a move in the right direction.

So, it seems that the mobile web is just about to really take off now and about time too. Stand by for more announcements, especially from O2 and Orange.