Comments on: Text-To-TV: Worth A Buck?

By: Text to TV

Text to TV — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 15:29:09 +0000

You know, for a more powerful Text to TV product that’s about twice as popular and much more regulated here in the USA and world wide, you should see (link) Text to TV Entertainment as they carry a wider variety of products which are must more cost effective.

By: Sparkey

Sparkey — Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:13:41 +0000

Yeah, I’m really skeptical on Premium SMS because it can easily be abused. Case-and-point, ROK TV. They claim to offer a free 2 month trial, but in order to download ROK TV to your mobile, you need to send a text to access the install file. Of course, not knowing how Premium SMS works, I went ahead and sent it. It’s only in the text you receive that you are notified that it costs 50c. And what’s even better is that even after you send the text, they want you to send another one to “confirm” - again, for another 50c.

Sorry, but once bitten, twice shy for me, so I abandoned my efforts. They just lost a possible customer because they had to do this backdoor crap.

Lesson learned there - I’ll be avoiding all SMS to 5-digit numbers from now on.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 17:42:15 +0000

Maybe somebody like iTunes should partner up. For the $1 you get a vote and a song download. iTunes could split the song profits with the text voting provider and maybe get some new regular buyers. If they do it with American Idol, they could really focus on giving downloads for the old iTune contestants.

By: PanMan

PanMan — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:38:33 +0000

Paying to text to TV is hudge here in Europe (or at least in the Netherlands). All the TV shows where you can vote via texting cost €1/vote (or so). It’s also often used for micropayments, and, offcource, sexual messages.
Strange that that isn’t common in the US yet.

By: Sam Spade

Sam Spade — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:05:47 +0000

Not really worth the keyboard they are typed on.

By: PaulSweeney

PaulSweeney — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:02:54 +0000

Perhaps it is more interesting that there is not a better revenue split between the show creator, the channel, and the carrier.

Given all the talk of new media models, perhaps the time to right to vote on shows you see on YouTube, and MySpace through Text, IM, or Voice?

I think the genius of text is that teens treat it like a conversation with a real person, its akin to gossip, or a popularity contests, and their is no perceived "barrier" to entry (no club membership, no sign up, etc. etc.)

Companies in Europe are now seeing that it is more difficult to get more meaningful interaction using text, so they are turning to voice based interactive services.

By: Gary Bourgeault (bizofshowbiz.com)

Gary Bourgeault (bizofshowbiz.com) — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 05:24:20 +0000

The question I have is whether this will be embraced by all shows that offer voting, or by selected ones. Will the fact that American Idol would be the one, be enough to overcome voting on something else that would be less expensive?

But as you say, certain people the idea of being put in a lottery in exchange for a vote. I wouldn't bother with that either.

"Idol" and shows like it though sometimes is watched in groups of people. And we know when that happens everybody will push each other to vote and spend.

Short-term it may do ok, but like you, I'm not sure there is really a future of in reality TV, when TV itself is losing eyeballs continuously.

Then, as you say, where will providers of these services be then? I don't see much of an upside either.

By: vineeth

vineeth — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 22:43:39 +0000

In India, a lot of FM Radio Stations more than TV shows use this all the time for special promotion prizes and regular on the hour polls with special gifts etc.

By: Katie Fehrenbacher

Katie Fehrenbacher — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 19:15:12 +0000

OK, I’ll officially never use bupkiss again. I was channeling my grandfather. ;)

By: Francesco Cardi

Francesco Cardi — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:54:35 +0000

Interesting article. I´m quite positive in premium SMS. Here in Europe there are many successfull examples. Regarding the issues of end users getting upset very easily in paying high fees, well, the secret is to be creative. If companies like Telescope will be able to continously invent new formulas / mechanisms to attract customers, success will be guaranteed.

Finally, just a note on the article style: thumb-cramper, bupkiss … come on Katie, you have an international audience ;-)

By: Gopi

Gopi — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:24:37 +0000

TV Game show based Premium SMS is already big in countries like India…Its very very lucurative and kinda like running your own lottery!.

To encourage as many people to SMS and at the same time to be within the legal boundry (prizes should be awarded for skill not chance) the viewer questions are very easy/obvious like “who is the president of US?” :)

By: Petteri Koponen

Petteri Koponen — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:22:00 +0000

In Europe, TV channels have had premium SMS based shows for quite a long time. Voting and fundrising are typical use cases for the service, but more interactive TV shows such as dating and games have also been around for ages. These are usually aired very early in the morning or at night and they are surprisingly popular - the rate of one premium SMS (50-100 cents each) arriving every couple of seconds is not uncommon even in a small country like Finland.

There is something addictive in sending an SMS and seeing it on TV a few seconds later :) I have tried the interactive games a few times and once you start, you can say goodbye for 10-20 dollars.

By: Davis Freeberg

Davis Freeberg — Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:18:59 +0000

I’ve got some serious reservations about how they are promoting these “contests” on the show and can’t help but wonder if we are seeing a fleecing of consumers by network executives. I don’t mind that they make money off of the texting, but the reality is that if consumers are paying $1 to enter a contest for $10,000, then it needs to be disclosed that they don’t even have a 1 in a million shot at winning. My take on this is that consumers are better off playing the lottery and view this as very unethical by the execs and their supporters. Specifcally, I think that Genworth is being irresponsible with their promotion of the Treasure Hunters contest by supporting what amounts to a very low probability gamble instead of making a good recommendation. Given their expertise in finance, if they are willing to support this type of scheme, I have to wonder how much they are willing to rip off consumers when it comes to their financial products.