I went to buy some lovely Full Sail LTD 03 beer at my local liquor megamart the other week, and was greeted with the above sign pasted on the front door. Being the adventurous type, I figured I’d turn on my Bluetooth and see what they were up to… but my Bluetooth was already on and by the time I finished that thought, I’d already gotten their first message (I’ll skip over the “What Constitutes Opt-In?” debate).
That first message? A business card with the store’s address and phone number:
I’ve never called my local liquor megamart, never had the need to and thought “if only I had their phone number!”, nor do I foresee such a need arising in the future. But thanks anyway, I guess. I then got a second message:
Sweet. If only I liked vodka and/or Red Bull. The targeting isn’t poor, so much as non-existent, but what I really didn’t get was how this was any better than setting up a display of this brand of vodka in the front of the store, just past the entrance, touting the offer. Wouldn’t that have actually been better? That way, it’s not limited to the small subset of folks who bother to turn on their Bluetooth, it doesn’t irritate those whose BT was already on, and didn’t want the message, and anybody who’s interested doesn’t have to go searching through the store for this particular brand of vodka and then find the Red Bull.
What is it about mobile marketing that makes people forget so much of what they know about marketing in general? It’s as if people get so besmirched with the idea that they’re doing something really cool by sending messages to peoples’ mobile devices, that any good sense goes out the window.
I see this quite a bit here in Vegas, and it perplexes me. The casinos spend so much time mining customer data and tracking behavior and all sorts of things through their loyalty cards and direct-mail programs. They’d never think of sending out some sort of promotion that they couldn’t track through their traditional methods, since they’re constantly trying to figure out the most effective ways to get consumers to put more money in their machines. But when it comes to mobile, very few of them do any sort of tracking, or really, do anything very useful.
For instance, I signed up to receive text offers from one major strip casino, and received an SMS offering a 2-for-1 drink at one of their bars. First, this was at 8 in the morning. Second, paying for drinks isn’t that big an issue on the Strip, assuming you’re gambling. Third, if you are the sort of customer who will be lured in by such an offer, how much value do you offer to the casino? Finally, they don’t know anything about me, and don’t have any way to track the responses. Furthermore, I can simply forward the message to anybody who’s interested in some cheap drinks. Perhaps the point for the casino is that any additional traffic is good, which at this point in their business cycle, might be true. But it’s hard to see how effective the message will be — not that the casino has any way to really measure it.
—–>Follow us on Twitter too: @russellbuckley and @caaarlo
Interesting piece. While I normally despise Bluetooth advertising (because most of it is easily and appropriately labeled as ’spam’, I’m actually quite impressed by the business card message. While the liquor store might not be the best, it would be great for sit-down restaurants, as I actually have a number of local ones saved to my phonebook, for hassle-free call-ahead seating.
I actually think SMS messaging is far better than bluetooth, and can think of several businesses I wouldn’t mind getting SMS from, including local bars, letting me know their drink specials for tonite, or an upcoming local band, for instance.
The problem, as you point out, is that most places using mobile marketing do not, for whatever reason, use the same logic that they use in other campaigns. For instance, while I would like to get the aforementioned SMS updates, I’m not 100% confident that they wouldn’t do something stupid, like send an ad along with their updates.
Right — you sort of underline my point. The business card scenario might make sense in some situations, but not all. But it’s probably part of the BT ad provider’s basic package, or something, and they’re selling on being oh-so-cool by sending out this high-tech stuff, rather than taking the time to think about what’s appropriate for each client.
First question from the states is I wonder if this is even legal? Advertising to minors? What if I am going into this store to buy wine for our evening party with my 15 year old son who has a phone also. Now he gets this message? I can imagine some very upset parents.
Next thought, if it is legal, which I doubt, I agree with the advertising comment that a poster would be better. The better use of this marketing would be to transfer some really fun 30 second adverts to the phone that they have previously produced, or great sports moments, or something that advertises their brand that can go viral…
I can also attest that I have never called a liquor store and really have no need ever to call a liquor store. I know where they are, and unfortunately, I know what they have to offer.
Come on guys..I thought the debate about opt-in for Bluetooth had moved on? It’s a broadcast mechanism – I don’t have to opt in to get the BBC World Service on my radio right? By switching on Bluetooth I am implicity accepting broadcasts from any device within ~20m, commercial or non-commercial. My opt out option is not to switch on Bluetooth.
From a media perspective I can see how selling Bluetooth media is more attractive than floor or shelf promotional space. It is managed remotely by a 3rd party so the shop assistants don’t have to look at a planogram and stick up posters so saving time; promotional apathy amongst retailers is one of the main reasons for promotion failure. The shop assistants leave the packs from head office under the till. With Bluetooth, the retailer can rotate campaigns thus creating ‘impressions’ that follow reach/frequency rules thus increasing the likely hood of a targeted hit and propect conversion. Rotation means more advertisers, potentially generating more revenue for the retailer.
In the UK at least, the argument about targeting minors doesn’t apply to in-store promotions (or outdoor posters in shopping malls or bus shelters for that matter – both high youth dwell areas) so why should Bluetooth be a special case???
Chris Bourke, Mobext
At mm3 we noticed that it was the brands themselves (and a few individuals there) that had the best ideas for mobile marketing campaigns, not the agencies and certainly not the media bureaus, that risk losing face towards the customer if they suggest a new means of marketing that might fail.
One concern companies might have about SMS marketing is that it costs per user, but on the other hand it could be much more targeted (existing customer base for specific types of items) instead of the broadcast and arguably effective marketing (yet “safe”, as the marketing budget is already set) we see everyday in magazines, TV, on posters etc. Compared to e-mail marketing it’s more expensive, but on the other hand you might spend $$$$ on getting a well-designed e-mail message.
Most marketing mm3 has done is SMS or MMS based, and mostly triggered via other media, like “SMS to win”, “SMS to vote”, “MMS your photo” etc, even though there’s also been bulk messaging to club members etc.
Regarding Bluetooth:
It’s good for situations where the user is anonymous but the venue (and message) is specific, which is the case if you are in a shop of whatever kind.
The message has to convey context-specific value to me as potential buyer, like a coupon for rebates to show at the counter or new items etc. Not generic messages like “Buy at …”. I’m obviously already there.