Google has made lots of waves in tech and media worlds with last week’s revelation that mobile search volume now outweighs desktop. That goes for several developed markets including the U.S. This follows recent LSA data that show mobile has surpassed desktop for local-intent search.

These are two different measures but directionally similar. With mobile local queries, the point at which they surpass desktop was bound to be earlier than overall mobile search, given that local’s share of mobile search (about 50 percent) is higher than the desktop equivalent (about 20 percent).

We’ve been saying for quite some time that 2015 would be the year that mobile local query volume surpasses desktop local query volume, which turned out to be on target. Here’s our projection from April 2012.

We now believe based on lots of evidence and inputs that the intersecting point actually happened late last year. Adjusting to that reality and looking forward from the current period. Our forecast released last month projects mobile local search query volume as follows.

Google’s announcement last week shows that the growth of mobile search is even more pronounced. That intersecting point of mobile and desktop search isn’t just happening with local queries as shown above, but in overall search too. This is huge.

This is of course a milestone in the continued growth of mobile content. But it’s really only one indicator. As I often say when presenting mobile data, search is only one format through which mobile content and ads are distributed. It’s currently the biggest… but it’s only one.

Discovery Channel

In the relatively short history of the smartphone, search has been in a battle with discovery-based content such as apps, push alerts and social sharing. The latter, as it grows in organic usage, is likewise increasingly becoming an ad vehicle — starting national but very much moving local.

Meanwhile Google, with a commanding search market share, has the most to lose from this. Impressively, it’s not showing signs of succumbing to the classic innovators dilemma in terms of embracing “discovery” based media. This can be seen in Google Now and lots of other things.

Google knows that the future of search is both active and passive. For the latter, apps like Google Now will perpetually search on users’ behalf to proactively push “results” when pre-defined relevance thresholds (such as geofence) are triggered.

Watch Carefully

The passive discovery format will only grow with the (still questionable) advent of wearables, where the user experience is even less conducive to typing search queries (voice search will find a home). So it will be all about discovery a la Google Now, and push notifications.

It will be interesting to watch (pardon the pun) this unfold with respect to user tolerance levels. Push notifications will require a careful balance given that the nuisance risk is greater on the sacred territory of one’s wrist, as opposed to the ignorable phone in their pocket.

This is all being built as we speak, and requires lots of experimentation for pinpointing the right delivery formula that resonates with users. No one has found that yet. But we do know, as always, that wide-scale changes in form factor invite volatility and entry points for disruption.

The post The New Era of Search Has Tipped appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

Starting today, Ifbyphone is DialogTech. In conversations with the company last week, it characterized this as a move to more adequately represent the market its pursuing. In the evolutions of mobile devices and overall telephony, voice-based leads aren’t just coming in by “phone.”

Beyond semantics, there are deeper connotations that the company will reveal in the coming weeks. It’s kicking that off today with a new product launch that couples with the brand unveiling. Known as LeadFlow, it’s a toolset for third parties to build call-based leads marketplaces.

In other words it lets anyone create their own pay-per-call market. The idea is that lead brokers can arbitrage calls between incoming sources — such as generic but vertical-specific ads — and advertisers that bid on those leads. Think of it like an ad network in a box, but for voice.

“In the advertising world, affiliates solicit ad networks to run ads on their behalf, then distribute them to businesses bidding on that lead flow,” DialogTech CEO Irv Shapiro told me. “But if you want to do that with voice, you need quite a bit of phone infrastructure. That’s what LeadFlow is.”

In that way, the concept of brokering leads is nothing new. Nor is the overall call monetization opportunity. But bringing the two together is new — at least in this form. The tools to basically build your own call-based leads marketplace is meant to lower barriers to get in the call monetization game.

“This has been done with voice, but only on a proprietary basis by people who build it for themselves,” said Shapiro when I asked what makes this different. “So we’re creating a platform to democratize that make it available to any entrepreneur that believes they can put together a market.”

Meanwhile, the volume of phone calls continues to grow in the smartphone age. And the market value of call leads is growing as well, especially in high-value verticals with high-consideration purchases and complexity. That need for that human interaction isn’t going away, even in a digital age.

“Because something like life insurance is a complex purchase, [consumers] don’t want to fill out a form, they want to call a number,” said Shapiro, “An even better example is home health care. If you are going to find somebody to help watch Mom, you’re talking to them; you’re not doing that over the web.”

And that gets back to the new branding and its double entendre. While call analytics accomplish a log of dialing activity (among other things) the root word is meant to invoke dialogue — the basis of human communication that underlies the call monetization opportunity.

The post Phone Leads Marketplace and a Fresh Coat of Paint: A Briefing with DialogTech appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

The call is the new click, as we keep saying. Phone calls to businesses have ratcheted up in the age of the smartphone — a device that bolts a search engine to a phone. We project this to grow to 72 billion calls by 2018. And it’s not just quantity but quality… these are high-intent consumer calls that convert well.

We examined these concepts and supporting data in a mega-session at our December ILM conference. The first of several videos is embedded below: the session’s introductory segment in which Abid Chaudhry and I set the stage for all of the speakers with a BIA/Kelsey data presentation.

This continues our call monetization coverage including white papers, blog posts and more conference sessions at future shows. It will be a quickly moving and opportune space to watch.

The post Conference Video: Call Monetization in the Smartphone Age appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

Today Marchex launched an analytics tool to better capture what it quantifies as a $4 billion opportunity for call-based mobile advertising. Call Analytics for Search is the newest addition to its mobile ad measurement product suite, and it targets enterprise-level advertisers.

The feature set (from today’s press release) includes:

— 100% keyword attribution from all phone calls driven from mobile search.
— Real-time conversion data using Marchex Call DNA technology to identify those calls that are most likely to convert into sales.
— Automated setup and synchronization with leading bid-management platforms, such as DoubleClick, Kenshoo and Marin, which allows search marketers to measure and improve campaigns accurately in real time.

This all comes back to the growth in consumer-initiated phone calls from mobile search.  BIA/Kelsey’s forecasts phone calls  from mobile search to reach 72 billion annually by 2018 — largely driven by smartphone penetration and evolving mobile user behavior.

“Click-to-call ads from search results has become a massive driver of incoming phone calls from mobile consumers to local and national businesses,” John Busby, Marchex SVP of Consumer Insights told us.

But there’s still a gap for tracking the source and quality of most of these calls. By applying technology to fix that blind spot, the idea is to give phone leads better attribution metrics.  And as call volume continues to increase, marketers will be more compelled to rely analytics to make sense of it all.

“In conservatively looking at our own data and the broader industry, we came to the surprising realization that while there’s now $4 billion being spent by marketers on click-to-call, there was not a solution for full measurement and attribution,” said Busby.

_______

BIA/Kelsey analyst Mike Boland, who co-wrote this post, will be a guest speaker on a webinar with Marchex at 1PM EST today.

The post Marchex Brings More Clarity to a $4 Billion Click-to-Call Market appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

According to our newly released LCM wave 18 data, SMBs find that call-based leads tend to be of higher quality than email (where SMBs reported 43% to be good/excellent), Facebook (35.3% good/excellent) and even in store visits (58.8% good/excellent). Between those SMBs that found call-based leads to be of “good quality” (33.2%) or “excellent quality” (35.5%) that’s an astonishing 68.6 percent. What does this mean? Increasingly, phone calls are becoming the bread and butter lead-type for the vast majority of small businesses.

This has led to a lot of interesting and complex challenges for marketers that service SMB campaigns – with the most pressing issue being how to attribute offline calls that came from online campaigns back to the campaigns themselves. Dynamic call-tracking numbers have been able to solve this problem partially, but still don’t provide the depth of analytics that are necessary to create the highest return on investment for marketing campaigns.

This is where companies like Invoca come in. Until recently, SMBs have had a difficult time tracking the digital path a consumer took that led to them placing a phone call. Essentially, once a person calls into a business from an online campaign, they would switch from online to offline and would appear “new” to the business. Existing marketing automation, retargeting, and CRM software platforms often go blind once this transition takes place.

Invoca and other call analytics platforms have developed solutions to bridge the online-offline call intelligence gap, and have been able to equip marketers with the necessary data and insight needed to maximize marketing campaign ROI. We recently sat with the Invoca product team to learn about Signal, their new phone call analytics solution designed to assist businesses with connecting keywords and campaigns to phone calls – layered with contextual data that aids in analyzing the content of the call in real-time.

A key element of the tool is dynamic session-based tracking. In the event a number changes from one campaign to the next, the customer will still be remembered and identified from the last time they clicked through and called. Once the call occurs, the software creates or links to an existing profile, attributes information related to the call, then allows for data dips into third party solutions, then finally routes them to another sales department based on a lead scoring and routing automated metric system.

Signal takes the context of the call a step further with sentiment analysis after the call has been connected and a conversation has begun. Pairing these two types of data while connecting it with keywords from the online campaign provides SMBs with interesting call attribution capabilities.

Call-based leads will continue to be the gold-standard lead-type for SMBs as mobile devices and mobile search continue to boom. We expect the interest/demand for call intelligence and analytics solutions like Invoca’s Signal product to grow as marketers continue ride the mobile-call wave.

The post Invoca Adds Context to Calls with Launch of Signal appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

This week has been all about Apple. That’s included some decent analysis, and a whole lot of overblown adoration that “they’ve done it again.” Larger iPhone screens are great but I’m not sure they’ll fit into the skinny jean pockets of the millennial target audience.

In all seriousness as an Apple fanboy, longtime user, and industry watcher, I see implications for larger screens to jumpstart lots of cool app development. I’m bullish on what this will do for content and ad delivery, but downright skeptical about Apple Pay.

Building on our pre-launch analysis, let’s take those one at a time, putting aside the Apple Watch for another post.

Size Matters

Larger screen iPhones are important for lots of reasons. But let’s be clear that this is one of the cases where Apple isn’t leading but following. The SamDroid world is way ahead on this one. Regardless, the marketplace demands larger screens so that’s where we are.

This is also interestingly one of those times when Apple is going back on a vehemently drawn line in the sand. Few people remember Steve Jobs’ fastidious stance that 3.5 inches was the canonical sweet spot for a smartphone (size of original iPhone through the 4s).

Part of the marketplace demand for larger screens goes back to other macro factors such as better connectivity and Moore’s law-driven hardware improvements. These have converged to enable the age of social sharing through Instagram, Snapchat, etc..

Capturing and sharing multimedia via increasingly powerful optics is commonplace. So larger screens to consume that media is a natural progression that aligns. And we’ll see the app development community do some cool things to utilize a larger screen.

The Ad Angle

For the same reason, the ad ecosystem just got a lot more interesting. As we discussed in our last video roundtable, and Peter Krasilovsky’s post earlier this week, larger screens have lots of implications for ad delivery.

But importantly, this won’t just mean more real estate for larger banners. Successful ad strategies will take more of a holistic approach to delivering brand messaging in ways that are more native to a bigger screen… rather than making existing banners larger.

And the ad implications go back to the social sharing point.  We’re moving past mobile advertising’s first few phases which were all about banners. Content marketing is gaining lots of steam from the above cultural and technological trends around social sharing.

This translates to advertisers sharing multimedia to communicate a message. For brands, that’s Instagram images (cold beer against a sunset, etc.); For SMBs, it’s capturing experiences in and around their locations via Instagram, Vine or Yelp’s new video feature.

The point is that larger iPhones are cohesive with these macro trends so it should play well. Again, Samsung is already there, but a larger iPhone is notable given its  leading share of ad impressions — despite a disproportionately lower share of device ownership.

Hucksterism at its Best

Here we go again with the overblown excitement over mobile payments, and the inability to learn from recent events. Perhaps there’s the implicit feeling that Apple will do what others have failed to do — which it has done numerous times (tablets, MP3 players, etc.).

I don’t believe payments is going to be one of them, and for one simple reason: It continues to be a solution in search of a problem. Generalist tech media (and mobile payment providers), continue to contrive a problem that doesn’t exist: plastic credit card use.

Even Apple’s video to pitch Apple Pay had a comical “before” rendition of consumers fumbling with credit cards. It was the stuff of bad infomercials that show pasta sauce spattering all over the counter and walls; enter the magic snapping lid to solve all problems.

As I keep saying, the value proposition for mobile payments has to be something greater than reducing my wallet by the atomic mass of a credit card. Those could include tangible benefits like skipping store lines, saving time, or substantial monetary rewards.

We’re talking about deeply entrenched payment habits for which there are high psychological switching costs, due to inherent security concerns. And that might be the only place Apple went right in its Apple Pay pitch: leading with the security advantages.

As background, Apple Pay is encrypted at the point of sale, not revealing payment information. That’s more secure than plastic credit cards, given that store associates or restaurant servers absolutely can see that info — the number one source of credit card fraud.

But not sharing and tracking that information is also one of Apple Pay’s downsides. This eliminates one of the often-repeated endgames for mobile payments… to facilitate rewards programs via shopping history. That isn’t going to the the case, at least for now.

What Came First?

Finally, my reticence about Apple pay comes straight from NFC. We’ve seen this technology’s implementation struggle for years due to one main factor: the chicken and egg problem.  Merchants won’t invest in costly POS terminals without a critical mass of usage.

The thought is that Apple has jumpstarted the latter. But has it really?  We’re at least a year from ubiquity of NFC enabled iPhones — at least a level that’s going to cause a dent in retailers’ business case to upgrade POS terminals. It’s a compatibility issue.

The mismatch in this two sided marketplace — needing scale and network effect to get over that compatability hump — will be further dampened by the original argument above… no one is clamoring for a digital solution to an analog problem that doesn’t exist.

In fairness, Apple has signed on lots of retail partners already. But that’s the classic Apple halo effect… the same reason iAd had top brands lining up to run campaigns after the first shiny announcement. We all saw what happened when that died down.

Apple Pay will be a ghost town for at least several months, during which you can expect to see more than a few YouTube videos capturing POS mishaps and confusion. That won’t be quite as good for PR as the sparkling keynote address that launched it.

And Why?

Whether or not they work, let’s get straight Apple’s intention for launching these features.  It’s not ads, payment processing revenues, or anything else as others have speculated. It’s all about selling more iThings.

Apple’s core revenue stream is hardware. That is how it makes money and how it has positioned itself to derive massive margins and a stratospheric market cap.  All moves it makes are to protect and grow that revenue stream.

Making its devices more attractive via greater functionality and gadgetry is the reason for this week’s announcements (the same argument applied to its mapping acquisitions). That’s where iWatch comes into the picture. But again, that’s a post for another day.

The post Payments, Screen Size and Skinny Jeans: Apple's Local Angle appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

This week has been all about Apple. That’s included some decent analysis, and a whole lot of overblown adoration that “they’ve done it again.” Larger iPhone screens are great but I’m not sure they’ll fit into the skinny jean pockets of the millennial target audience.

In all seriousness as an Apple fanboy, longtime user, and industry watcher, I see implications for larger screens to jumpstart lots of cool app development. I’m bullish on what this will do for content and ad delivery, but downright skeptical about Apple Pay.

Building on our pre-launch analysis, let’s take those one at a time, putting aside the Apple Watch for another post.

Size Matters

Larger screen iPhones are important for lots of reasons. But let’s be clear that this is one of the cases where Apple isn’t leading but following. The SamDroid world is way ahead on this one. Regardless, the marketplace demands larger screens so that’s where we are.

This is also interestingly one of those times when Apple is going back on a vehemently drawn line in the sand. Few people remember Steve Jobs’ fastidious stance that 3.5 inches was the canonical sweet spot for a smartphone (size of original iPhone through the 4s).

Part of the marketplace demand for larger screens goes back to other macro factors such as better connectivity and Moore’s law-driven hardware improvements. These have converged to enable the age of social sharing through Instagram, Snapchat, etc..

Capturing and sharing multimedia via increasingly powerful optics is commonplace. So larger screens to consume that media is a natural progression that aligns. And we’ll see the app development community do some cool things to utilize a larger screen.

The Ad Angle

For the same reason, the ad ecosystem just got a lot more interesting. As we discussed in our last video roundtable, and Peter Krasilovsky’s post earlier this week, larger screens have lots of implications for ad delivery.

But importantly, this won’t just mean more real estate for larger banners. Successful ad strategies will take more of a holistic approach to delivering brand messaging in ways that are more native to a bigger screen… rather than making existing banners larger.

And the ad implications go back to the social sharing point.  We’re moving past mobile advertising’s first few phases which were all about banners. Content marketing is gaining lots of steam from the above cultural and technological trends around social sharing.

This translates to advertisers sharing multimedia to communicate a message. For brands, that’s Instagram images (cold beer against a sunset, etc.); For SMBs, it’s capturing experiences in and around their locations via Instagram, Vine or Yelp’s new video feature.

The point is that larger iPhones are cohesive with these macro trends so it should play well. Again, Samsung is already there, but a larger iPhone is notable given its  leading share of ad impressions — despite a disproportionately lower share of device ownership.

Hucksterism at its Best

Here we go again with the overblown excitement over mobile payments, and the inability to learn from recent events. Perhaps there’s the implicit feeling that Apple will do what others have failed to do — which it has done numerous times (tablets, MP3 players, etc.).

I don’t believe payments is going to be one of them, and for one simple reason: It continues to be a solution in search of a problem. Generalist tech media (and mobile payment providers), continue to contrive a problem that doesn’t exist: plastic credit card use.

Even Apple’s video to pitch Apple Pay had a comical “before” rendition of consumers fumbling with credit cards. It was the stuff of bad infomercials that show pasta sauce spattering all over the counter and walls; enter the magic snapping lid to solve all problems.

As I keep saying, the value proposition for mobile payments has to be something greater than reducing my wallet by the atomic mass of a credit card. Those could include tangible benefits like skipping store lines, saving time, or substantial monetary rewards.

We’re talking about deeply entrenched payment habits for which there are high psychological switching costs, due to inherent security concerns. And that might be the only place Apple went right in its Apple Pay pitch: leading with the security advantages.

As background, Apple Pay is encrypted at the point of sale, not revealing payment information. That’s more secure than plastic credit cards, given that store associates or restaurant servers absolutely can see that info — the number one source of credit card fraud.

But not sharing and tracking that information is also one of Apple Pay’s downsides. This eliminates one of the often-repeated endgames for mobile payments… to facilitate rewards programs via shopping history. That isn’t going to the the case, at least for now.

What Came First?

Finally, my reticence about Apple pay comes straight from NFC. We’ve seen this technology’s implementation struggle for years due to one main factor: the chicken and egg problem.  Merchants won’t invest in costly POS terminals without a critical mass of usage.

The thought is that Apple has jumpstarted the latter. But has it really?  We’re at least a year from ubiquity of NFC enabled iPhones — at least a level that’s going to cause a dent in retailers’ business case to upgrade POS terminals. It’s a compatibility issue.

The mismatch in this two sided marketplace — needing scale and network effect to get over that compatability hump — will be further dampened by the original argument above… no one is clamoring for a digital solution to an analog problem that doesn’t exist.

In fairness, Apple has signed on lots of retail partners already. But that’s the classic Apple halo effect… the same reason iAd had top brands lining up to run campaigns after the first shiny announcement. We all saw what happened when that died down.

Apple Pay will be a ghost town for at least several months, during which you can expect to see more than a few YouTube videos capturing POS mishaps and confusion. That won’t be quite as good for PR as the sparkling keynote address that launched it.

And Why?

Whether or not they work, let’s get straight Apple’s intention for launching these features.  It’s not ads, payment processing revenues, or anything else as others have speculated. It’s all about selling more iThings.

Apple’s core revenue stream is hardware. That is how it makes money and how it has positioned itself to derive massive margins and a stratospheric market cap.  All moves it makes are to protect and grow that revenue stream.

Making its devices more attractive via greater functionality and gadgetry is the reason for this week’s announcements (the same argument applied to its mapping acquisitions). That’s where iWatch comes into the picture. But again, that’s a post for another day.

The post Payments, Screen Size and Skinny Jeans: Apple’s Local Angle appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

A lot of us were glued to our screens today to watch or catch the feeds on the Apple announcements re iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, Apple Pay and Apple Watch. (To me, the best coverage was on Re/code). What will the new announcements mean to our local ecosystem? To date, Apple’s focus on local has mostly been geared to Apple Maps. But here are a few things:

1. More content for larger screens. When the iPad was introduced, vendors such as Matchbin bet the bank that it would lead to higher paid subscriptions and new types of advertising. It didn’t really happen. But more content is behind the firewall now than before. The intro of the larger iPhone 6 and the really big iPhone 6 Plus — on top of other Phablets by Samsung et al might push this evolution further — and spur the develop of new tablet-ready and phablet-ready local content.

2. A jumpstart for Digital Payments. Apple Pay is being launched as an NFC wireless payment mechanism. Unlike the struggling Google Wallet, it is being supported by most of the industry’s payment processors and financial institutions; allowing consumers to tie their payment cards to their phones. The introduction of Apple Pay won’t turn plastic extinct overnight — the payments card infrastructure is extremely deep. But it does validate NFC as a wireless payments technology, and should help build acceptance for digital payments. The challenge here: It is not converting Apple users. It is converting Millennials.

3. Enter the Apple Watch. It may take a while for iWatch and other wearables to really catch on beyond the early adopters, who do not really impact local outside of tech centers such as San Francisco. But combined with Apple Pay, the Apple Watch should help build acceptance for local store payments, public transport and other services (and impulse cash less buying.) Again, their immediate importance is in Apple’s validation of both wearables and NFC. See how LevelUp is excited about the prospect .

Apple’s system appears to be overloaded, but don’t forget to download the free U2 album, Songs of Innocence, which will be available on iTunes until 9/13.

The post Quick Thoughts on Apple's Big Announcements appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

A lot of us were glued to our screens today to watch or catch the feeds on the Apple announcements re iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, Apple Pay and Apple Watch. (To me, the best coverage was on Re/code). What will the new announcements mean to our local ecosystem? To date, Apple’s focus on local has mostly been geared to Apple Maps. But here are a few things:

1. More content for larger screens. When the iPad was introduced, vendors such as Matchbin bet the bank that it would lead to higher paid subscriptions and new types of advertising. It didn’t really happen. But more content is behind the firewall now than before. The intro of the larger iPhone 6 and the really big iPhone 6 Plus — on top of other Phablets by Samsung et al might push this evolution further — and spur the develop of new tablet-ready and phablet-ready local content.

2. A jumpstart for Digital Payments. Apple Pay is being launched as an NFC wireless payment mechanism. Unlike the struggling Google Wallet, it is being supported by most of the industry’s payment processors and financial institutions; allowing consumers to tie their payment cards to their phones. The introduction of Apple Pay won’t turn plastic extinct overnight — the payments card infrastructure is extremely deep. But it does validate NFC as a wireless payments technology, and should help build acceptance for digital payments. The challenge here: It is not converting Apple users. It is converting Millennials.

3. Enter the Apple Watch. It may take a while for iWatch and other wearables to really catch on beyond the early adopters, who do not really impact local outside of tech centers such as San Francisco. But combined with Apple Pay, the Apple Watch should help build acceptance for local store payments, public transport and other services (and impulse cash less buying.) Again, their immediate importance is in Apple’s validation of both wearables and NFC. See how LevelUp is excited about the prospect .

Apple’s system appears to be overloaded, but don’t forget to download the free U2 album, Songs of Innocence, which will be available on iTunes until 9/13.

The post Quick Thoughts on Apple’s Big Announcements appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.

The most notable similarity is that both genders make the majority of local purchases in person. According to BIA/Kelsey’s Consumer Commerce Monitor™, 66.6 percent of men and 65.2 percent of women purchase products and services in person from local sources.

Because consumers make most purchases at physical locations, reaching them at or near those locations is a good bet; enter mobile marketing. How to reach them on mobile devices, however, is where we see differences by gender.

Women are socially engaged, so social advertising is essential. According to Nielsen, the majority of mobile social network users are female, so it’s understood that a lot of their social network usage is done via mobile device.

Because Facebook is the most used social media site for local shopping by women, it is important for local businesses to establish a Facebook page and form relationships with female consumers. This could include promotional opportunities on Facebook pages that female consumers can redeem at physical business locations.

Men, as we’ve discussed, are more engaged with mobile devices. They also interact more with traditional media than women do. TV in fact is men’s most used source for local shopping (women’s is online search), according to Consumer Commerce Monitor.

To effectively reach men, local businesses should therefore maintain advertising through traditional media. But when doing so, traditional media can be used to drive traffic towards digital opportunities. This is especially true for mobile, given that the data indicate men are highly engaged there.

CCM data also indicate that local businesses can benefit from mobile advertising and innovation at their physical locations. This includes smartphone scan loyalty programs.

(Click image to expand)

The post Men vs. Women: How to Reach Local Shoppers Based on Gender appeared first on BIA/Kelsey - Local Media Watch.