Brady Murphy

Brady Murphy is a founder and managing partner of Vortex Mobile. Since 2004, Brady has been leading Vortex's sales and marketing efforts and has acted as the company's chief evangelist for all things mobile marketing. His expertise lies in leveraging mobile applications to create compelling brand experiences that encourage dialogue between companies and consumers.

Prior to founding Vortex, Brady worked in promotions where he gained valuable insight into media, sponsorship, word of mouth & viral marketing, CRM, and direct marketing. Ever an advocate for permission based marketing, Brady has helped Vortex clients such as Levis, Bacardi, Procter & Gamble, Nestle and Energizer cut through the media clutter and forge stronger relationships with their customers.

Brady is a prominent member of the IAB's Mobile Committee and has regularly contributed his expertise through both published materials and speaking engagements.

The iPhone effect?

Can Mr. Jobs single handedly revolutionize the Wireless Industry? That’s up for debate. Personally I doubt one handset will force a paradigm shift in the mobile ecosystem. However it will have a major influence that will surely shake up an industry where the power is clearly with the carriers. If the iPhone does 1/10th of what the iPod did to the balance of power in the music industry, then get ready for a wild ride.

Canada’s largest wireless carrier, Rogers (and Fido) have already felt the muscle flexing by Apple. In a release last year Apple indicated they would only consider coming to Canada if their carrier partner implemented an unlimited or, as mobile people would say, “all you can eat” data plan. Progress on this issue has been sluggish to say the least, but there are some positive signs.

Apple, the “Teflon” brand that it is, would never allow exorbitant monthly carrier fees to be associated with the darling of all consumer brands or for that matter restrict fun, friendly mobile browsing. Some will argue that the US’s adoption of the unlimited plan is the stronger influencing factor for Canada.

Others are speculating that Rogers couldn’t resist the temptation to latch on to the 800 lbs gorilla. From a brand perspective, with an exclusive partnership with Apple Rogers can distance themselves from the dreaded “dumb pipe” scenario.

What does this mean for marketers?

In a previous post where I discussed the Mobile landscape I outlined the three major areas of Mobile: (1) Mobile Messaging, (2) Mobile Content, which in my opinion is synonymous with downloading and applications), and (3) Mobile Internet (including mobile search).

It clearly impacts mobile internet and mobile content. It affects mobile messaging to a lesser degree. I believe mobile messaging is least affected because the utility of messaging is the immediacy and timeliness, having a cooler handset to read a 136 character message is not going to impact messaging campaigns.

The iPhone and the browsing utility it offers will begin to put to rest the notion of WAP is CRAP. In my opinion the unlimited data plan will do what inter-carrier SMS did for mobile messaging. Get ready for localized search on your phone. Even keeping in mind the iPhone price range will prevent most of us from ever owning one, the other 99% of the handsets out there that don’t have touch screen viewing will still let consumers to hit brand websites, sport and entertainment portals and, most of all, their social networks.

Finally when it comes to content/downloading/applications, the iPhone and Google Android (coming soon to a phone near you) will make the consumer truly mobile - where content, information, entertainment, social networks etc. are served up courtesy of widgets and applications in SDK environments.

All the mobile interactivity you want will soon be in your pocket. Just remember to lock you keypad.

Mobile Best Practices: The Mobile Call-to-Action for Media Executions

A mobile marketing company should offer more than a technology infrastructure for executing and managing wireless applications. Because this is a relatively nascent form of marketing/communications the strategy and tactical execution are critical components to successful campaigns. Details matter! A good mobile provider will provide insight into the details that can make or break a mobile campaign. And since all campaigns begin with a media execution, I thought I would share some creative best practices

The prominence of the mobile call-to-action has an enormous impact on the results of a campaign. Here are some creative guidelines for Art Directors to consider when they are designing and producing POS, OOH, packaging, T.V. (including VOs) creative.

The two most important elements to a mobile call-to-action are:
1) What the consumer should send, like a “keyword” or PIN number – For example text MALIBU
2) The shortcode number - in the above example 212121

Placing emphasis on these two pieces of information will positively impact results.

Additional Guidelines:
•The keyword and shortcode must stand out from the rest of the copy. Designers must ensure they don't bury the call-to-action in ‘mouse print’ or results will suffer. Designers should consider reversing and bolding the keyword and shortcode number.
•If non-static media like T.V., Digital signage or Radio is used, producers and directors must ensure the keyword and shortcode number get enough airtime so consumers can act on it. Repetition never hurts.
•In cases where the shortcode number is a long string of continuous numbers like 777777, it’s best to have a space between the 3rd and 4th digit. A person’s memory works by grouping numbers in 3. Therefore 777 777 is more effective than 777777.
•The price point must be included in the execution. Most often brand-related mobile campaigns will include “Standard text-messaging rates apply”; it reinforces that the shortcode is NOT a premium rated code. Conversely, if the code is premium rated than the voice over and media execution must inform consumers of the price point in Canadian dollars. (for some odd reason the CWTA forces broadcasters and content owners to publish rates in Canadian currency, which seems very odd to me because no non-Canadian wireless subscriber would be able to interact with the shortcode anyway)
•A value exchange: why would people interact with the shortcode? Typically that value is: 1) a reward i.e. a chance to win something, 2) information, or 3) entertainment.
•Mobile phone imagery
•A tagline informing users how they can opt-out, for example “to end this subscription send the word STOP to the shortcode number.

Drop in a comment with thoughts on good mobile creative integration and share examples of executions that have caught your eye – the good, the bad and the ugly.

Branding Mobile Destinations?

In a recent blog post on Onedegree.ca , Kate Trgovac raised the question of shortcode squatting. Her comment inspired this post about the value of vanity codes - the 5 or 6 digit numbers that can be used to represent a brand or trademark. For example, PEPSI currently leases the number 73774. (Take a look on your phone for the numbers that spell Pepsi, you’ll see what I mean).

So what about Shortcode Squatting?

There’s really no such thing as squatting on codes in mobile messaging. I can’t say the same about .MOBI sites but I’ll save that for another post. Here are some reasons why shortcode squatting doesn’t exist.

Cost

Applying for a shortcode from the CWTA will cost you $1,500. This initial payment will grant use of the code for 3 months. To maintain the code for month 4 and onward, a monthly lease fee of $350 applies. To squat on the code for a full year will cost about $5,000 (1,500 + (9x 350)) = $4,650), a far cry from the $7.95 that godaddy.com charges for a .com or .mobi domain.

CWTA restrictions

Applying for a shortcode through the CWTA can be a lengthy and sometimes frustrating experience (especially for those brands and agencies that elect not to use an experienced mobile vendor). Your shortcode number request, which must be 5 or 6 digits and cannot start with number 4, will be reviewed by no less than three people before it gets discussed among the carriers. You better cross your T’s and dot you I’s and make sure you actually have Pepsi signed on as your partner, otherwise you’ll never get approval. You can try and be crafty and use the same numbers but brand it a different word, but be warned of this website www.phonetic.com

Branded shortcode vs. branded keyword

I find brands get too preoccupied with the notion of branded shortcodes. My recommendation is always to choose an easy shortcode number like 12345 and use the keyword for branding purposes. (Remember that a mobile call to action incorporates two pieces of information – the destination number and the message. The ‘destination number’ is the shortcode and the ‘message’ is the advertised keyword.). You want something that sticks in people’s minds to encourage multiple interactions, word of mouth and brand/program recall.

So which way is more memorable?

You be the judge:

Text WIN to 73774 (Pepsi)

OR

Text Pepsi to 12345

QR codes (a.k.a. 3 D codes) - The holy grail for mobile marketers?

Despite recent attention spurred on primarily by a couple of agencies that all of a sudden were mobile marketers, QR codes will not make many waves in 2007 or 2008. Don’t get me wrong, the technology will eventually make a huge impact and I applaud the recent efforts by Vespa to incorporate the technology but as the old saying goes – you need to walk before you run. For an explanation of QR codes visit a smart microsite developed by Dentsu Canada.

Very cool isn’t it? This scenario will happen, however I feel compelled to address some barriers and assumptions to this model. They are:

Handset limitations. Keep in mind handsets must be web enabled and able to send/receive picture messages - which isn't a substantial barrier. However more challenging is the software application that must be downloaded to receive and process the codes. I tried to snap a picture of the Vespa QR code recently but the fine print instructed me to visit a WAP site to download the app. A bit of a pain, but I was a very motivated consumer. Unfortunately my Nokia 6265i (which is less than a year old) was not supported and I was unable to enter the contest. What the Denstu website failed to point out in their Japanese example was that the Government, wireless carriers and manufacturers all got together and decided to pre-load the app in most phones.

Entry mechanism. I don’t understand why taking a picture of a code is easier than sending a keyword to a shortcode and receiving a WAP push (WAP push will facilitate a WAP session where the QR code is hosted). I am extremely confident that a SMS call to action will yield a much higher response rate vs. a “take a picture” call to action. Because the audience is asked to take a picture this raises a proximity barrier. Let’s not forget that part of the appeal of mobile is the viral benefits. How would one enter this contest without being near the media execution? This proximity shortcoming is also my beef with Bluetooth transmitters.

QR Readers. No doubt the greatest barrier to the scenario described in the microsite is the redemption of these codes. Imagine for a second retrofitting hundreds, or even thousands, of Coke machines with one of these readers. Needless to say, I won’t hold my breath. North America is at least 3-4 years away from having m-commerce enabled vending machines that can support a campaign of this nature. Once again this is a similar infrastructure challenge to Bluetooth technology. The reach is just not there.

Mobile Ticketing is the first step.
We’ve already started to see some examples of QR in action, most notably with Rogers wireless at one of the Toronto Raptor playoff games this past season (see Strategy Magazine sponsored supplement, August 2007) This foray into QR was viable because redemption occurred at one physical location. In my opinion, POS terminals and back office software vendors will be a catalyst contributor to moving this technology further.

One last note, why are these called 3 D codes? Last time I checked my mobile screen was flat...

Take These Two & Text Me In The Morning

Being on the front line of the battle field for new media, I am privy to many conversations and viewpoints regarding mobile marketing. I think the CMA blog is a perfect forum for me to discuss the two biggest mobile myths/misconceptions.

Consumers are charged premium rates ($0.25 +) to interact in shortcode campaigns. There’s a distinction that should be made clear regarding mobile revenue driven campaigns (Deal or no Deal, Canadian/American Idol and those useless and annoying ‘joke of the day’ commercials) versus brand interaction driven campaigns. Revenue oriented campaigns are usually associated with T.V. properties and have come under scrutiny for duping audiences by not being explicit about the premium fees associated with the interaction. In addition, a class action lawsuit has been filed against several T.V. properties for running pseudo lotteries. Mobile applications like these have led some people in the marcom world to believe that by extension all mobile campaigns are going to charge consumers to interact. Our best practice ties the mobile campaign to a standard rated shortcode - where interaction costs the same as texting a friend.

Mobile is the new spamming tool. No brand should even consider the idea of sending unsolicited messages to consumers, so don’t even think about buying a mobile database. You’ll do much more harm than good. Privacy laws in Canada force our industry to communicate with only those who have given us permission to do so. In addition, any mobile alert campaign that is sent to a consumer must have an opt-out method. These opt out tags look something like “to opt out reply STOP”. If this action is taken by the mobile user, he/she will no longer receive mobile communication.

The fact that these issues keep coming up is a good sign that we're thinking seriously about the implications of using mobile as a marketing tool. But let's be clear - just like in other marketing disciplines there are best practices and then there are examples that give the rest of us a massive headache.