No Limits On Mobile Content

I posed a question I posed in a post about Slinky content being put on mobiles: Is there anything or any brand that cannot be used for mobile content?
Alan responded that:

yes, there are things that cannot be used for mobile content, at least, not successfully! i”d contend that this’d be one of those. How much personwidth went into the licensing negotiations, the marketing plan, the content repurposing? Do they really believe they’re going to make that money back with ringtones and wallpapers about a slinky?

It’s a good point — the return on investment has to be enough to justify the cost (although how to calculate brand-awareness and so on is beyond me). The real question he asks is how much effort and money went into making this content? I’m guessing not a lot. AG probably has some defined contracts and all the content already existed, it just had to be repurposed — which could pretty much be done automatically. It may have taken no more than an enquiring phone call and a couple of hours with an editing suite. The content offered isn’t going to set the world on fire, but I doubt it will cost the companies much even if they sell nothing at all.
Making content specifically for mobiles that is intended to be a big hit (games, viral videos etc) can be a very expensive passtime, but the market has hit the point where if you have a picture, a video and 30 seconds of audio you can go mobile with a wallpaper, ringtone and video ringtone with pretty much no effort or cost. You don’t even have to host the content… It’s not a get-rich-quick scheme: As Alan points out, Slinky’s fortunes are not going to be made with a ringtone of a commercial and pictures of a hyperactive spring.
In this market I think we will quickly see every brand and product and thing going mobile, at least with the basics. There’s no real reason not to…I still can’t think of anything where it would have a net negative effect…

loading

Comments have been disabled for this post