Skip to main content

Significant Upside for U.S. Mobile Advertising


eMarketer estimates there will be 280.8 million U.S. mobile phone subscribers by year-end 2009. In contrast, comScore Mobile estimates a slightly lower 233 million, including 29 million smartphone users.

Theoretically, that amounts to more than 200 million targets for mobile advertisements -- a medium projected by eMarketer to reach $760 million in spending in 2009.

In 2013, the market will reach $3.3 billion -- based upon double-digit yearly growth. But, according to the report from comScore Mobile, some types of advertisers are doing a better job of capitalizing on this trend than others.

In April 2009, broadcasting and cable TV, movies and entertainment, and automobile manufacturing were the leading industries using mobile advertising.

Over the past year there's also been more promotion of traditional industries like personal products, apparel, packaged foods and food retail. Certain industries are also seeing great success monetizing their mobile ads.

Downloads, real estate, services and search pages each had 100 percent of their mobile ad inventory paid for. However, struggling with monetization were home and family, health and business information companies.

Only one-fifth of all mobile inventory are house ads. The supply and demand dynamic is reminiscent of the early Internet. That could result in a significant upside for the future of U.S. mobile advertising.

Popular posts from this blog

Bold Broadband Policy: Yes We Can, America

Try to imagine this scenario, that General Motors and Ford were given exclusive franchises to build America's interstate highway system, and also all the highways that connect local communities. Now imagine that, based upon a financial crisis, these troubled companies decided to convert all "their" local arteries into toll-roads -- they then use incremental toll fees to severely limit all travel to and from small businesses. Why? This handicapping process reduced the need to invest in building better new roads, or repairing the dilapidated ones. But, wouldn't that short-sighted decision have a detrimental impact on the overall national economy? It's a moot point -- pure fantasy -- you say. The U.S. political leadership would never knowingly risk the nation's social and economic future on the financial viability of a restrictive duopoly. Or, would they? The 21st century Global Networked Economy travels across essential broadband infrastructure. The forced intro...