After hearing about services like MyScreen and Sugar Mama, I wondered how this model was sustainable. After all, you don’t see many outlets where end users get paid to view advertisements. As with anything this new, I tended to view it through a lens of skepticism. But then I came up with an analogy.
Think about Google’s AdSense program. If you publish on the Internet, you can sign up through them and have them serve ads to your site. When visitors to your site click on those ads, you get paid. Google does the legwork in signing up advertisers and ensuring that their ads are served appropriately.
In the incentive-based model, it seems that the end user replaces the publisher. Instead of serving an ad to a website and paying based on the number of clicks, ads are served right to the mobile user, who are paid just for viewing. MyScreen and Sugar Mama, then act as middlemen, like Google.
Of course, the sting here is that advertisers gain more from the pay per click model. They pay for only people who click the ads, but their message is shown to everyone who visits that publication. So their reach extends further than their payout. Whereas when ads are being served to a mobile user, it is them, and only them, who see the ads.
So I’m still skeptical as to its sustainability, but not as much as I was initially. Really, I’m far more concerned about the privacy issues than the lifespan of the business model.
It sounds good, but beware
It’s easy to get roped into a deal that seems too good to be true. Yes, being paid to view advertising sounds like a great deal, but when it’s at the cost of having your information sold to other advertisers, well, it doesn’t sound so sweet. Now does it?
Still, incentive-based advertising is a young model, and could prove viable as advertisers and network operators search for the best way to deliver advertising over mobile phones. Our cell phones are personal, and we simply won’t tolerate the kind of advertising we see in print and broadcast media.
But if mobile advertising is going to hit us either way, we might as well get something from it. Right?
Posted By : Joe
Think about Google’s AdSense program. If you publish on the Internet, you can sign up through them and have them serve ads to your site. When visitors to your site click on those ads, you get paid. Google does the legwork in signing up advertisers and ensuring that their ads are served appropriately.
In the incentive-based model, it seems that the end user replaces the publisher. Instead of serving an ad to a website and paying based on the number of clicks, ads are served right to the mobile user, who are paid just for viewing. MyScreen and Sugar Mama, then act as middlemen, like Google.
Of course, the sting here is that advertisers gain more from the pay per click model. They pay for only people who click the ads, but their message is shown to everyone who visits that publication. So their reach extends further than their payout. Whereas when ads are being served to a mobile user, it is them, and only them, who see the ads.
So I’m still skeptical as to its sustainability, but not as much as I was initially. Really, I’m far more concerned about the privacy issues than the lifespan of the business model.
It sounds good, but beware
It’s easy to get roped into a deal that seems too good to be true. Yes, being paid to view advertising sounds like a great deal, but when it’s at the cost of having your information sold to other advertisers, well, it doesn’t sound so sweet. Now does it?
Still, incentive-based advertising is a young model, and could prove viable as advertisers and network operators search for the best way to deliver advertising over mobile phones. Our cell phones are personal, and we simply won’t tolerate the kind of advertising we see in print and broadcast media.
But if mobile advertising is going to hit us either way, we might as well get something from it. Right?
Posted By : Joe
No comments:
Post a Comment