Real Estate Advertising Trends: Newspapers Will Gain, Online Will Not

It might be true, at a strategic level, that newspapers are a declining medium while the Web is a growing medium. At a tactical level, that does not automatically mean ad spending always, inexorably is shifting from print to online.

The newspaper business, for example, might see a 16 percent increase in real estate advertising in 2010 while online real estate advertising actuall drops about four percent, more than it declined in 2009.

Ironically, media segments that have generally been perceived as weak, including newspapers and broadcasting, are set to do better. Conversely, those that have been otherwise least affected by the economic downturn, cable and online, are poised to do worse.

Real estate spending on broadcast TV will surge 39 percent in 2010 after declining 44 percent last year. Cable TV will drop 16 percent this year. In 2009, cable TV real estate ad revenue fell just two percent.

Part of the reason for the disparity among the major media segments is that local real estate advertisers have been increasing their spending, while national, out-of-market realtors are decreasing their spend.

The other angle is that so much money has shifted to online formats that there isn't a much room to grow, when other alternatives are more affordable.

About three of every five online ad dollars are currently spent by real estate agents and brokers. Not 60 percent of real estate advertising; 60 percent of all online advertising.

Another reason for the decline in online spending by realtors and brokers also is the result of a tactical shift. More money is being spent on less-costly paid search programs, less on display ads.

Sometimes the conventional wisdom can be wrong. It appears it certainly will be wrong about real estate ad spending in 2010. Newspapers and broadcasting will get more growth; cable and online less.

New Verizon Wireless Pricing Shows Growth Strategy

Verizon Wireless today announced that it is introducing new data, prepaid, and voice plans on January 18, 2010. The single biggest change is a new mandatory data plan requirement for all 3G multimedia devices. For "feature" phones, that will mean a $10 a month charge for use of up to 15 Mbytes. 

Smartphone packages remain at $30 a month. 

But Verizon also introduced new unlimited postpaid plans for voice ($70 a month) and unlimited talk and text for $90 a month. Prepaid unlimited plans sell for $75 a month for voice, and $95 a month for unlimited voice and texting.

"Nationwide Unlimited Talk Family SharePlans" will be $120 a month while "Nationwide Unlimited Talk & Text Family SharePlans" will cost $150 a month.

All Family SharePlan pricing includes the first two lines of service. The new plans do not apply to existing customers, though any current customer can change to any of the new plans without a penalty or contract extension.

So heree's the strategy background. Verizon wants to build the biggest-possible data customer base before it launches its new fourth-generation Long Term Evolution network. That's an essential part of getting a financial return on the 4G investment, and also reflects the growing importance of smartphones as a percentage of total devices sold and the importance of data service revenues.

Verizon also wants to protect its base of "high-value" customers by simplifying pricing plans, providing more value and encouraging uptake of higher-end plans. Verizon expects to see higher data penetration, higher average revenue per user and less churn, with lower-end customers moving up to unlimited plans in greater numbers. 

Verizon believes the moves to unlimited plans also will reduce operatinal costs. Since a large percentage of customer service costs are driven by consumers concerned about their usage and overages, unlimited plans will blunt the volume and cost of handling such requests. 

Strategically, the data plan moves also are a reflection of the vanishing voice revenues business, and the absolute centrality of data revenues as the mainstay of Verizon Wireless revenue. 

Are Emerging Market Consumers Different?

A new study by Accenture suggests that, in a globalized world, consumer demand for a wide range of technology products is remarkably similar, at least among those emerging market buyers with disposable income.

In fact, consumers in emerging markets are twice as likely as those in developed markets to purchase and use consumer technology in the next year and are more willing to pay a premium for “environmentally friendly” consumer electronics products, says Accenture.

The Accenture survey of 16,000 consumers in four “mature” countries (the United States, Germany, France and Japan) and four “emerging” countries (China, India, Malaysia, and Singapore) suggests current and future spending and usage patterns for 19 different consumer technologies, including smartphones, high-definition TVs and computers, is remarkably similar in developed and emerging markets, with one exception: developing market consumers are more likely to buy smartphones, PCs and other devices over the next year.

Compared with consumers in mature countries, consumers in emerging countries are more than two and a half times as likely to buy a smartphone during the next year (52 percent  compared to 20 percent).

Emerging market consumers also are more than twice as likely to have bought a smartphone in the past year (67 percent compared to 32 percent).

Twice as many emerging market consumers are likely to have bought a computer in the past year (40 percent vs. 20 percent). They also are more than twice as likely to have at least occasionally played video games on handheld devices (58 percent compared to 28 percent).

Do they use social networking? Yes, at about a 69 percent rate, compared to 38 percent in the developed markets.

Emerging market consumers also are significantly more likely to pay a premium for consumer products marketed as being environmentally friendly (84 percent compared to  50 percent).

“One of the reasons for this emerging-country growth is the rapid expansion of the middle class with its substantial disposable income,” says Jean-Laurent Poitou, managing director of Accenture’s Electronics & High Tech industry group.

“Furthermore, our research shows that the increased demand for smart connected wireless devices such as smartphones is being driven by social-networking applications.

“Emerging-country consumers use mobile devices more than they do computers to access Internet-enabled applications and services, and consumers in mature countries are also headed in that direction.”

Are Social Networks More Like Email or Google?

Social networks already have become a lead application for mobile devices. A new study by Accenture finds that “increased demand for smart connected wireless devices such as smartphones is being driven by social-networking applications," in both developed and developing economies.

But you likely still can get a good argument about whether social networking is a "feature" or a business model. Email for the most part remains a "feature." Early in the development of the dial-up business, email was so important it actually drove adoption of Internet access. These days, with the advent of Web mail and business and organization email, it simply is a feature, but not a direct revenue model (except for providers of email hardware and software).

Google and other Web mail providers have started building an advertising revenue stream, but it largely is ancillary.

The same sort of argument can be made about social networking applications. Skeptics point to Twitter, Facebook, MySpace,  Bebo and Geocities, which either are struggling to create a business model, or have been shut down.

Optimists might say that although many attempts will fail, a normal situation for the Internet applications business, one or two of the players will discover a sustainable business model and possibly even achieve "Google" style success.

Most believe advertising will be significant, and skeptics say social networks are not conducive to most types of display advertising, for example.

That would explain why no social networking company has yet emerged as a public company: there is not yet a viable business model.

It is possible that some new model will be discovered in time. Twitter, for example, is nearly at breakeven as a result of a search results deals with Google and Bing. That's not a complete answer, but it helps.

It is not yet possible to determine the final outcome. It is conceivable that some social networks will drive so much engagement and value that some will be acquired by larger firms able to leverage the networks to deepen and extend their other existing business models. In that scenario social networking winds up more like email than Google.

Right now, it likely is a coin toss which model is most believed.

Brands ARE Media These Days

Brands are media companies these days, many marketers would argue. That's a huge shift in thinking from an older world where third parties did "media," and then brands simply advertised in those media.

These days, more and more companies are becoming publishers or content providers in their own right, bypassing "media" outlets.

"The fundamentals of media business are toppling as their 20th century foundations crumble," says Mark Mulligan, Forrester Research VP. "Consumers are falling out of love with paying for media and striking up illicit affairs with free content, not just because it is free, but also because it is on their terms."

This is great news for consumers but terrible news for media businesses that have spent years building revenues upon near-monopolistic control of supply of content, says Mulligan.

"Why all this matters to brands is because the tectonic shifts in media value chains are creating exciting new opportunities for non-media companies to become media companies themselves," Mulligan says.

Just as Apple transformed from hardware company to media services company with the launch of the iTunes Store, so too are brands such as Procter and Gamble with BeingGirl.com, Tommy Hilfiger with Tommy TV and Audi with its UK TV channel.

Why are brands such as these choosing to become media companies? Because they can. Blogs, Web publishing, smartphones, tablets, e-book readers, netbooks and other tools providing access to the Internet allow firms to create media sites as easily as old-line publishers can.

It takes a Web site, but every firm has one these days. It takes an ability to create or aggregate content, but that's easier these days as well, with real simple syndication and other news feeds. But brands also are simply creating their own writing staffs as well.

And the logic of doing so likely makes more sense as well, as audiences fragment. If specialized audiences are what you want to reach, Web publishing makes lots of sense. Instead of creating and placing advertisements that might or might not hit the target audience, brands can create their own content sites, producing their own "media" and then placing messages and interacting in other ways with their intended audiences.

In the new world, the dividing line between "media" and "brand" is more fuzzy.

Skype "Dial Tone" No Threat to Mobiles, Fixed Lines

About 21.5 million Skype users were logged in simultaneously on January 11, 2010, which likely is a record.

Some refer to this as "Skype dial tone."

To give you some idea of how far Skype would have to go to be a credible alternative to other forms of consumer voice, consider that in March 2009 there were 4.1 billion mobile subscriptions in service, according to the International Telecommunications Uniion. The ITU also estimates there are about 1.3 trillion fixed lines in service globally.

So make that 5.4 billion devices that have "dial tone," compared to a third of a percent of Skype accounts, at peak. To the extent communications really does depend on network effects, Skype has quite some ways to go.

Business Prepaid Wireless Heats Up

Business customers have not been big users of prepaid mobile services. But that could be changing. Compass Intelligence expects growth of about 10 percent over each of the next three years.

Estimated to represent approximately five million of the 57 million prepaid subscribers by the end of 2010, prepaid business users make up a small part of the prepaid market at the moment, and is a recent trend.

About 60 percent of of decision-makers offering employees prepaid devices say they have done so far one year or more,” says Kneko Burney, Chief Strategist of Compass Intelligence.

One would be tempted to suggest that a new frugality caused by the recession is the reason business prepaid is picking up, and that likely is part of the explanation. But one might also suggest that more businesses are trying to control fast-growing mobile expenses. Shifting to prepaid is one way to do so.

“The real finding here is that the 'corporate liable' segment of the overall wireless market (representing roughly 14 percent of all wireless subscribers) is expected to change as a result this increase in business prepaid," ays Burney. Contracts will need to become more flexible and carriers will be wise to find a way to accommodate business needs for “prepaid-like” options in contracts, particularly for mobile broadband and possibly even push-to-talk.”

Decision-makers are most likely to provide prepaid devices to “sales people,” executives, business owners, IT or telecom staffs.

For many, the primary reason that prepaid is attractive is because it is “less of a hassle compared to a monthly contract.”

Prepaid mobile broadband also is getting traction. Many respondents to the Compass Intelligence survey say they will be buying nearly as many prepaid mobile broadband devices as prepaid mobile phones in 2010.