So Orange has become the latest operator to open up at least some of its subscriber database to advertisers. Brands will no doubt be delighted, though they will be even more so when the number of subscribers available rises beyond the 100,000 with which Orange is launching.
One of the major criticisms levelled at Blyk (whose technology Orange now owns and is using), was that while it was a great offering for test campaigns, it never had the reach to enable brands to run a full-blown campaign, and that was when it had twice as many people on it as Orange is launching with. No wonder brands in Turkey are so keen on Turkcells permission marketing database, which at the last count numbered 9 million.
Still, at least Orange is giving numbers, something which O2 has so far steadfastly refused to do for its O2 More offering, arguing that the figure is commercially sensitive. Orange has now also come up with an answer to a question we posed this morning, about how many messages it will permit those on the database to receive in a given time period. It says that initially, it is allowing three messages per week, but adds that this limit is not set in stone. (Orange also confirmed that someone texting STOP does not count as a response, in the sense of a positive response quoted in response rate figures. A cynical question to ask, you might think, but one that needed asking in the light of rumours we heard about another ad-funded mobile offering.) O2 caps the number of messages at one advertising message per user per day.
This could be a crucial factor in the success or otherwise of these initiatives. Because consumers may be happy to opt in to ads on the promise that what they will receive will be relevant and, potentially, financially rewarding, if they are being offered discounts and special offers, for example. But the minute the offers and ads stop being relevant, or the minute they start getting too many of them, may well be the point at which they opt out, and the operators find themselves with an asset that is diminishing, rather than increasing, over time.
I really hope this doesnt happen. Because if these moves are a success, if nothing else, it will prove what those on the mobile marketing coalface have been preaching since day one. That if you are open, transparent, and seek consumers permission, marketing to people on their mobile isnt the least bit spammy, (as those coming to mobile for the first time often wrongly assume), but potentially, as good as marketing can get. Whether brands and mobile operators can capitalise on this potential will depend on how carefully they manage the process; on whether they can resist killing the goose that might one day just lay the golden egg.
It will be a year or two before we know the answer to this one.

David Murphy
Editor