Google Shows Off Ad-Supported Cell Phone

taoman1 writes "Today Google showed off a ad-supported cellphone that the company plans to offer for free to interested parties. The product could reach the marketplace within a year, and will offer Google search, email, and a web browser. 'The move would echo another recent product launched by a phone industry outsider, Apple Inc.'s iPhone. But Google's product would draw its revenue from a sharply different source, relying on commercial advertising dollars instead of the sticker price of at least US$499 for an iPhone and $60 per month for the AT&T Inc. service plan. Negotiating the fairest way to split those advertising revenues with service providers could be a big hurdle for Google, one analyst said. Another problem is the potential that consumers could be scared off by the prospect of listening to advertisements before being able to make phone calls, said Jeff Kagan, a wireless and telecommunications industry analyst in Atlanta.'"

Comments

Pictures?

[Shadowplay00]

This article is useless without pics

listen to ads?

[SolusSD]

I can't imagine ANYONE using a phone as their main phone if they had to listen to ads before every call-- unless they couldn't afford a cell phone in the first place, inwhich case I doubt those ads would attract many buyers. :)

Re:listen to ads?

[CoffeeIsMyGod]

Unless of course calls are free and unlimited. I for one wouldn't mind dialing then getting a cup of coffee while an auto insurance jingle played if it would mean free long distance.

Re:listen to ads?

[middlemen]

People do that with their television and radio, don't they ? And yet for some of them, their lives are pointless without the TV or radio, just as for many others their lives are pointless without the telephone. Imagine an audio ad of "Girls Gone Wild" before calling your mother.

Re:listen to ads?

[SpinyNorman]

As an emergency phone to keep in the car it'd work fine.

Re:listen to ads?

[blantonl]

I can think of tons of ads that folks that "could not afford a cellphone" would "benefit" from:

1. Bail Bondsman
2. Liquor Stores
3. Liquor
4. Beer
5. Prostitution
6. Check Cashing Stores

The list could go on and on. Where there is a consumer, any type of consumer, there is an advertiser just waiting to get their attention.

Re:listen to ads?

[Eric52902]

Tell me that when you're listening to an Enzyte commercial after the crash.

Re:listen to ads?

[networkBoy]

I would imagine similar to a non-activated phone still dialing 911, the google phone not blocking 911 calls with an ad.
I'd likely get one, so long as that single criteria was met.
-nB

Re:listen to ads?

[iamhassi]

"Unless of course calls are free and unlimited."

Agreed! Gotta love this quote from the article:
""The average adult who can afford a cell phone is not going to want to listen to ads. So this is mainly for teenagers, twenty-somethings, high schoolers or people who can't afford a phone," "

Well then just add me to the list. By the time they add taxes, the cheapest text messaging plan and insurance I'm paying nearly $100 a month for a regular, "cheap" cellphone plan. Add me to the list of people who "can't afford a phone" because it's killing me. I would love to listen to a 30 second ad before making a call.

There was a 1-800 service I used many years ago called phonehog that provided a calling card for use at payphones if you listened to ads. For every 30 second ad I listened to I think I got a 3 minute call. Worked very well and I loved the service, but when payphones started disappearing and cellphone plans got cheaper I stopped using the service.

Google's free phone will kill the prepaid market. Who would pay $50 for 400 minutes when they can get the calls for free? I think I would like an option though, maybe if I press # and the number then deduct the minutes from prepaid minutes but if not then I'll listen to ads.

What about incoming calls? Some companies, like Sprint and US Cellular offer free incoming already with select plans. I suppose Google would have to implement something similar, they can't delay an incoming call so you can listen to some ads.

Re:listen to ads?

[fimbulvetr]

Agreed. Google, to date, has proven to be quite effective at dishing out ads that don't negatively affect me. I'm not inundated with doubleclick monkey shooting win IPOD ads, rather I get ads based on somethings I'm writing about in email, searched for, or reading about.

Google has a chance to pioneer "effective" advertising, of the type that is extremely context sensual - enough so that it wouldn't arguably be a nuisance to most people. Try this: Go to google and search for "japan". Then search for "vacation". Boom - it puts up small ads about vacations to japan. Convenient? Yes. Obtrusive? Hardly. Innovative? Absolutely. Relevant? Likely.

There are a hundred things, I, as a consumer, would love to see ads on *right now*, but not the old school ads - the new kind. The kind that advertise there's a new chinese restaraurant with 5 star ratings 1.4 miles from my current location. Or the kind that let me know there's a new used game store 3 miles from me that pays more than gamestop for trade ins and sells them for less. Or the kind that say there's a new book at amazon with 5 star ratings on PHP OO when I'm bitching about PHP's OO in IM. There are zillions of these kinds of examples, and if google pioneers it, I will gladly welcome the demise of the doubleclick assault.

Re:listen to ads?

[aesiamun]

They wouldn't be paying attention if they were on the phone either. Maybe verizon, sprint and at&t shouldn't be able to offer cell phone service either because it could end up killing someone.

GM, Ford, Honda and others shouldn't be able to sell cars because they could be used to kill someone.
KFC, McDonald's, Wendy's, Taco Bell,etc shouldn't be able to sell fast food because it could kill people.

It's the responsibility of the consumer to understand the consequences of what they do, as well as far any laws put into effect by their state. Listening to an ad or listening to their friend, they aren't paying as much attention on the road...

Re:listen to ads?

[canUbeleiveIT]

Imagine if you had lived your whole life surrounded by people working at jobs that barely made ends meet. Now imagine how you would:

a) Fit your head around the notion that you could get a job that paid well, having no direct experience with people with such a job.
b) Obtain the skills to get that job.
c) Recover, with no support network, from the inevitable bad decisions or bad luck that befall everyone.
d) Develop all of the skills and habits to take advantage of financial success, having not been raised with them.

If your parents worked professional jobs, ever bought you a car or bailed you out of some financial problem, or paid for your college, you have NO CONCEPT of why the poor are "the poor".

Part of the problem is similar to (although much less severe than) trying to understand how people could do the stupid things they did hundreds of years ago. You live in a different culture, that has given you tools to become successful and build on that success. What's more, the culture has given you confidence in those tools that just hearing about them can't convey.

While I admit that I don't have any answers to the problem, I don't think that it's simply a matter of not knowing how, not having the opportunity, not having skills, or not having models of success. If that were the case, how would one explain the success of so many of the illegal immigrants that thrive in my area?

They face hardships that the native poor can't even begin to fathom. They come from the poorest parts of Mexico and Guatemala, which make US housing projects seem like palaces. Most can't speak English, are poorly educated and are relatively unskilled. Being illegals, they have a tenuous (at best) support networks, are frequently victims of crime that they can't report, as well as face racism and general antipathy. Yet they come here, work hard, save their money and move up the social ladder.

The place that I live in is a semi-rural area, with lots of mobile homes and ramshackle houses, high unemployment, and little in the way of industry or opportunity.

• Because of the lack of mass transit, the locals claim they can't get to work. The immigrants ride beater bicycles in the snow.
• People here claim that they can't save their money because everything costs too much. The immigrants share housing and eschew luxuries until they can pay cash instead of taking out payday loans.
• The people here--when they do get a job--get fired for constantly showing up late, calling in sick, being lazy, uncooperative, drinking, etc. The immigrants show up early, are willing to stay late and have a generally pleasant attitude about working.

And for the record, my parents never worked professional jobs, bought me a car, bailed me out, or paid for my college. We moved to this country when I was seven with nothing. My single mother, my brother and I lived in a nasty, one-room basement apartment for three years until she saved the enough money (cleaning rich people's houses) to buy a small house. She continued the cycle of working and saving her money, and in another few years, we moved to a nicer house.

Instead of having an allowance, my brother and I walked or rode our bicycles to nicer neighborhoods so we could cut lawns, shovel sidewalks, rake yards, etc. to earn money. We took jobs as soon as we were able, saved our money and worked hard at school.

Both of us fucked up some in our late teens and early twenties but were never bailed out. I put myself through college at age thirty-two, while working full-time and raising children. My brother is a biologist and I own a business that does pretty well.

My wife has a similar story. While she's lived in the US all of her life, she grew up in a very poor family and she worked her way through sevens years of pharmacy college.

But I can't help but think that the opportunity is there. Will it be as easy as it will for those who have social connections, money, and easy access to education? Hell no, but it *is* there. Why people don't take it? I really can't come up with a good answer.

The voice version of AdSense?

[l33t.g33k]

I sure hope that those ads won't be targeted based on one's conversations, like they are on Gmail. That would be extremely scary.

Re:The voice version of AdSense?

[ignipotentis]

The geek in me says this would be extremely cool (from the technology point of view). Picture this. The Google phone service analyzes your conversation (no data is permanently stored... must do no evil remember). When certain key words are found, Google flags your phone to download certain advertisements to say, your background image. Each time you open your phone to use it, you see a new advertisement targeted to you based on your previous conversation. Add to this a browser, and you could quickly and easily purchase what your are being advertised using your phone.

Re:The voice version of AdSense?

[dotpavan]

and God forbid if one mis-pronounces something, there would be a voice in a condescending tone with the "did you mean..?" question

Re:The voice version of AdSense?

[Da_Biz]

When certain key words are found, Google flags your phone to download certain advertisements to say, your background image.

...and also intriguing is that Google engineers may be analyzing the 1-800-GOOG-411 service for popular
voice keywords and search topics while mobile.

Areas of possible analysis:
--The voice data recorded is being analyzed to train their system to recognize popular search items, i.e., "where's a pizza place?" in a call. The voice recognition training would then be applied to the Google Cell service triggering an uninvasive, but welcomed, advertisement.
--The requests being made on 800-GOOG-411 are aggregated into marketing data that shows what's popular to look for on landlines or on the move. If the NPA-NXX is generally for a cell phone, Google can say that X block of numbers during Y time tends to make requests for Z. Add GPS capabilities to that, and you've now got many dimensions to add to a model that determines which ads would be the most successful.

But does it run...

[sakdoctor]

Adblock?

Ads ads everywhere

[fishybell]

IMHO people are getting pretty fed up with pervasive advertising. Part of Tivo's initial popularity came from the ability to skip advertisements. The people quite obviously want less ads, not more. As all of google's money now seems to come from advertising, and they seem to only be innovating new ways to push ads, I'd say that they're going down the wrong path.

Would work for me

[PhilipMckrack]

I have rare uses for a cell phone, I can either be reached at home or at work, or I'm with my wife with her cell phone. I can't be reached for the 10 minute commute from home to work and if you can't handle that it's not my problem. The biggest thing preventing me from getting a cell phone is cost, I can't justify paying for something I'll rarely use. This would work perfect for me, the few times a month I need to call someone I can wait through an add.

The only drawback I can see is if your trying to make a 911 call and have to wait through a minute and a half of dice.com adds only to panic and hit 991 and have to do it all over again.

If they do this I'd probably pick one up as probably one of the 2% of Americans that don't currently have a cell phone.

Audio ads?

[Aladrin]

I see -nowhere- that Google has said these advertisements will be audible or will be played before a call. That's just FUD by the article writer. Until Google has said -anything- we don't know what their plans are.

In fact, Google has not even said the phones WILL be ad-revenue supported, as far as I can tell. There's a couple quotes from Google on there, but they only deal with Google apps on the phones, not the calling plans.

Re:Audio ads?

[kebes]

Indeed. The suggestion that users will have to "listen to ads before placing a call" is wild speculation. Moreover, it's rather inconsistent with Google's usual methods. Of all the advertising sources I can think of, Google is the only one that does ads in a reasonable, elegant, and even useful way. They don't do popups and annoying flashing graphics. They tend towards text ads and high relevancy.

My guess would be that a Google-phone would have text ads put into it based on emails you're reading (just like Gmail), or things you are searching. When you're not receiving a call, it would maybe display text ads for nearby events or businesses (with location determined from cell tower or maybe just based on your registered home address). Alot of people use their cellphone to check the time, so they would see these ads. Such ads would be relatively non-intrusive. You could look at them if you wanted to, and ignore them otherwise.

I think actually quite a few people would be willing to get such a phone. The article speculates that only teenagers and others without enough money will be interested in an ad-supported phone. I think the demographic is larger than that. A certain fraction of the population can afford, but cannot justify the expense. (E.g. they make enough money, but don't really ~need~ a cellphone or wireless email.) For this demographic, an ad-supported phone would be very attractive. ("$60/month to check my email when I'm on the train? No way!.... Read a few ads while checking my email? Sure, why not!") Plus, plenty of people who now pay for cellphones think they are getting ripped off, and would be more than happy to have one less bill per month, even if it meant having ads on the phone.

The demographic exists, and there is a way to insert ads that will not be obnoxious. The part I'm not so sure about is whether people casually looking at ads is sufficiently valuable for advertisers to pay the usual network connection fees.

Can't you see

[warrior_s]

FTA " Negotiating the fairest way to split those advertising revenues with service providers could be a big hurdle for Google, one analyst said."

Thats why Google wants to become the service provider itself and wants to buy that spectrum for itself.

not scary enough

[datapharmer]

No, scary would be if the party you called got to hear the ads too. Imagine the chaos it could cause if some spam style advert comes on in the middle of your business meeting!

you: Increase sales and....the size of your penis with cialis... by reaching out to new demographics....
pointy-haired boss: like women???

How Much are Ads Really Worth?

[inKubus]

The medium is the message. A big goal is location awareness. I doubt there will be audio advertising. More likely if you turn the phone on there will be a popup of a nearby business with a special offer or something. Or if you use data functions, there'll be targetted ads. GIS, you know.

Keep in mind they are bidding up that huge chunk of spectrum coming open soon and if they can snag some of it this could work pretty easily. Start small with a few towers in major markets, preferably near some dark fibre or a NOC they already have in place. Put their sales force to work and cross market to local businesses already using adwords. Lease airtime from other providers in the meantime, under the new regulations they have to provide a quality connection. They have plenty of cash to burn through and I think it would quickly prove itself one way or the other. Obviously offer the chance to "buy up" your service to remove some of the ads. But really try to make the ads real "content". Google has done a good job making ads "content" that actually provide value. In this case, let the consumer know that there's a nearby business offering a special. Don't spam the phone with popups for downloadable ringtones or phone sex lines.

I'm okay with ads which replace..

[Lord Bitman]

The sound of the phone ringing. So long as I'm not /delayed/ by the ads, I don't care.

I disagree

[DogDude]

I couldn't disagree more. The masses *love* ads. People pay to wear ads on their clothes. People pay to advertise their car's brands on their cars. People pay a large sum of money to their cable/satellite company every month to watch ads. People willingly sit through ads before a movie that they paid for. There are so many idiots out there who PAY to consume advertising, that I guarantee people are NOT fed up with advertising.

Personally, I'm fed up with ads, but I see no sign that regular people are fed up with advertising.

Re:I disagree

[Tom]

Totally off-track, DogDude.

One is brand recognition. Yes, people love to be associated with certain brands, due to the image those brands have created for themselves. But having a brand symbol on your jacket or shirt is not the same as having a full-page advertisement printed on it.

People are grudgingly accepting the ads before the movies. What I see are people talking to each other, waiting for the movie to start, people interested in the trailers, and some ads that are at least funny. But people are clearly there for the movie, not the ads, and are happy when the ads are over.

Regular people are fed up with advertising, but they don't express it, they accept it. But open your eyes and you'll see. Walk down your street and look on the mailboxes. In my street, at least two out of every three mailboxes carry a "no advertisement, please" label.

Apply directly to the nearest insane asylum

[Dogtanian]

Whenever I dial someone, it usually rings a couple times before they answer. Instead of listening to the ringing sound, perhaps they'll have you listen to an ad instead? You mean something short and snappy that directly replaces the "ring ring"? Hmm...
(Taps number in).

(Pause).

"Head on! Apply directly to the forehead!"
"Head on! Apply directly to the forehead!"
"Head on! Apply directly to the forehead!"
"Head on! Apply directly to the forehead!"
"Head on! Apply directly to the forehead!"

(Two minutes later)

"Head on! Apply directly to the forehead!"
"Head on! Apply direc.... Hello?"
"If you ever take that long to reply to your phone again, I swear I will kill you."

Re:further proof

[eNygma-x]

Oh come on.... this doesn't prove they are evil. And I think people missing a possibilty. Instead of hearing ring tones while you are waiting for someone to pick-up you you might hear 2-3 second Ad. you know... " This call brought to you by so and so" then boom the callee picks up. And the same when someone calls you. Plus this would not interfere with 911 calls. It is possible to do Ads without being invasive. If done right I think this would be a great phone to have. Plus even if someone linux hacked it... the ring tone Ads might still be under Googles control making Google happy and giving the hackers some fun. =)

Re:further proof

[networkBoy]

That's because Works is a shitty product, offering little, with a viable (superior) free replacement.

A free phone is more useful, even if it is ad supported. Add to that a browser and the Google touch and it's OK.
As I said earlier, I would use this, while in the case of Works I'll stick with notepad.
-nB

Re:further proof

[Thyamine]

They have a vastly popular search engine online, how does that translate to a monopoly in phones? If they were now denying access to their site to all non-Google phones, then yes I'd say they are using their might for evil, but they aren't. They're simply saying 'hey look we're Google and now we have a free phone'.

Microsoft used to threaten OEMs with higher rates or even denial of Windows if they did things like offered other OSes or bundled other browsers (way back when). Google is certainly large enough that they can commit similar evil acts, but I don't see how this would be one of them.