By Jo Best, 3 July 2006 14:25
NEWS
Mobile content and services have been quickening operators' pulses - but it seems Joe Public couldn't care less.
A report from analyst house JupiterResearch has found that the majority of European consumers - some 68 per cent - are not interested in paying for any data services outside text and picture messaging.
Text messaging unsurprisingly remains the most accepted data service with 79 per cent adoption while - despite the increasing penetration of higher resolution camera phones - MMS trails a long way behind, with 28 per cent take-up by European mobile users.
Mobile video is popular with just eight per cent of the continent's mobiles, and personalisation services - such as ringtones and wallpapers - get the thumbs-up from a mere 15 per cent of users.
According to JupiterResearch, a dearth of suitable handsets cannot explain the lack of enthusiasm. As phones with more sophisticated functionality - such as internet access - have hit the market, use of such capabilities has not risen accordingly.
Comments
There are 14 comments. Join the discussion
1. Ian B
Perhaps they should make the pricing of picture and video messaging more attractive to encourage take up !
Look at how broadband take-up took off once its pricing came into the same frame as dial-up ...
2. Steve
The Web exerience sucks on today's handsets. It's no surprise tha no one wants to use it.
3. Mike Perry
Perhaps they shold remember that these devices are, at heart, TELEPHONES and that only children are interested in spending money to treat them as toys.
4. anonymous
Price, price, price - I'm on 3 and I still consider my mobile bill expensive, without all the other addons...
I am sure the mobile industry struck lucky with the high price of text messages...
5. Mr Angry
Why are such distinctions made? I can't see why we have to pay one price for one service and another for another. Surely the cost of data transmission should be the overriding factor, and the customer (yes that's him, the guy who pays the bill) decides how he transmits his content based on price and performance. Modern phones are like computers in that they handle myriad data types. Why penalise frugal transmissions like SMS with exorbitant fees and let video mobile go by for a fraction of the cost per megabyte? It makes me so angry I could throw the phone down! :o)
6. anonymous
The network providers don't "get it". Showing off a swanky full function phone is like wearing an expensive watch or jewellery - makes a personal statement about fashion/cool/income/status - whether you can use the thing fully or not.
For most people, in terms of how they use the device, a phone is a phone is a phone. SMS is popular because it is simple, cheap and does something really useful. Many other new capabilities are expensive, hard to use, not much use on a small screen and, in the end, not that useful either. Who wants to sit staring at a tiny screen for long periods to watch some video???
7. Simon Cox
We are reaching technology saturation. People liked the idea of simple text messaging - its on a par with email but beyond that everything gets much more complex and most people have got better things to do with thier time. Ask yourself; at what point did you stop reading all the instructions on your gadgets? Do you know half of what your mobile phone, DVD recorder or toaster can do these days?
8. Cora H
Some European operators are already offering messaging bundles where a MMS costs the same as a text. This has to be the way to go.
9. Andrew Hodges
Perhaps people can't be bothered by the buggy, slow and painfully irritating mobile platforms that operators keep supporting.
I don't think its so much pricing the problem. I use mobile data everyday and one thing is clear. I will use it only when I really am relaxed and I have time to spare because my VPA, or my O2 XDA WILL Crash, fail or need connecting to a PC to be restored.
Windows Mobile 2003 and MS Mobile 5 is just too unreliable for most people to to be attracted to the use it.
I used to have a Palm Tungsten and that was more reliable but the battery would drain fast and it was too expensive because no one offered it as a package.
The only real practical solution today is the RIM Blackberry but in reality, its only priced for the royal family.
10. anonymous
Texting took off because it was cheaper to text than to make a voice call.
Other than 3G data none of the offerings have any great practical use, and until 3G data costs are brought in line with broadband then I do not see many people taking it up.
11. anonymous
Voice revenues are sinking faster than the Titanic, and the content strategies that seemed potentially huge five or six years ago amount to no more than straws at which to grasp, having been overtaken by Internet models that deliver what people want at a price people are willing to pay (read: free) that will soon be available on a WiMAX handset near you, also for free. Operators are becoming bit pipes irrespective of the 'value' they claim to add, and their only hope is regulatory, negative and disruptive. The lawyers can hold back the tide only for so long, and operators will begin to rethink themselves as providers of communications services with real value add, bundling access (and ONLY access) services according to availability, quality and security.
Also, they will try for as long as possible hold out on the revenue positive side of the net neutrality thing. Operators currently control the revenues for content providers in mobile, but not on the Net. Operators are trying to secure some of the revenues of EBay and Google for facilitating access, and trying to retain as much as possible of the ringtone / music download business in mobile. Neither will succeed, and the democratising effect of the Internet coupled with free markets will result in bit pipe providers, quality guarantors, security providers and content providers being the only ones left. Question is, how much time can the lawyers buy?
12. anonymous
I do not agree that mobile has reach a technology saturation point.
The problem with European operators is that they are NOT bringing in the content, handsets and technologies that attractive enough to gather users interest.
They bring in a lot of crappy low-end technologies that have low attraction, stuff that costs, but not TOO expensive. Naturally, the comments from the users will be that users do not need all these 'new' technologies.
The truth is that there are a lot of innovation out in the world that can stick, but are not brought in by the european telcos.
Just look at what Japan, Korea and even China are doing and you will know that users have not reach technology saturation. Users are just too sophisticated to fall for crappy add-ons that adds to cost, but do not value-add.
13. anonymous
The present title of this piece is somewhat ambiguous: I opened the item to find out why Europeans wanted to give up texting.
14. Andrew Lewis
I think some readers comments posted here are being a little too insular in approach. I upgraded to a 3G handset because I wanted 3G data speeds to link to my laptop. The only other feature I require from a cellphone is to make and receive voice calls all over europe. I tried a video call once for fun and am unlikely to do it again. I rarely send SMS messages and never send MMS messages. I am not interested in mobile TV and would definitely not pay to download a ring tone. This is my cellphone profile.
It would appear however the rest of the country are busy sending SMS messages by the 100s and download a lot of ringtones.
I think the network operators are offering a growing number of services that appeal to all sorts of different sectors of society.
It is really a case of each to their own. I remember paying £2000 for a Panasonic transmobile in 1986 with charges of 25p/min in full minutes and £25/mth line charge with no bundled minutes. When you consider this the prices today although more expensive than a landline are still pretty reasonable.