Mobile Subscribers

Mobile technology, as described by ABI Research’s Mobile Content End User Survey, has come to include a strong emphasis on data services as a primary offering. Through the Comparison of Mobile Subscribers and Social Networking Users by Nick Holland, two online surveys are used to evaluate the usage differences between these groups.

Holland finds that between the groups, Social Network Subscribers (subscribers to online social networks) have a younger demographic. He concludes that because Social Network Subscribers were twice as likely to have smart phones as overall Mobile Subscribers, it is because the former group felt that the data capabilities were worth the premium costs associated with owning such a device. To me, this assumption raises several questions: What other factors could cause this result? Could another factor be that more young people work at companies that are supplying them with smartphones? And, within the group of smartphone owners, how many of them actually use the smart features? Are some smartphone owners simply obtaining the phones to be trendy rather than to utilize its services?

Holland also notes that Social Network Mobile Subscribers were twice as likely to be regular users of mobile Internet services as Mobile Subscribers. This aligns, as one would expect, with his former acknowledgement that Social Network Mobile Subscribers are twice as likely to own smartphones. Text messaging, in contrast, was found to be a service more universally adopted between the groups.

Mobile e-mail usage, however, was again twice as prevalent among the Social Network Mobile Subscriber group. The use of e-mail on a phone draws further speculation as to whether the phone owners surveyed are utilizing the phones for work purposes.  What portion of the surveyed e-mails were sent for personal use versus professional use? As mentioned above, perhaps the phones were provided to the group by businesses – not costing any premium to the users, yet driving-up the e-mail usage rates.

Another question that can be considered relates to Holland’s assessment of mobile gaming usage. He notes surprise at the 31% mobile game usage rate of the general Mobile Subscriber group. This number should not be a surprise, as this group has an older demographic which aligns with the older demographic that is attracted to such casual games. According to a press release by casual game industry leader Real Networks, “more than 70 percent of people buying casual games from the company are women age 40 and older.” Therefore, the seemingly high number of mobile game users should not be shocking.

In addition to the previous questions, I would be curious to know:

• How many of the 1000 people within the Mobile Subscribers group were Social Network Mobile subscribers?
• Is the low number of mobile TV / video users due to a short mobile battery life?
• Has mobile adoption in the US piqued or plateaued, or at what rate is it still growing?
• Are mobile usage and social network usage growing at the same rate?

Holland’s analysis is useful, but leaves room for questions. While surveys provide statistical information that can be useful, they also offer a limited landscape for complete analysis.