Mobile queries on tablets spike between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. while consumers sit at home watching television -- which could support a cross-channel search and TV campaign strategy, according to Michael Slinger, director of mobile advertising at Google. That type of insight, shared by Slinger at the Search Insider Summit, should provide brands with a road map for charting search campaigns. For instance, Slinger said the single biggest barrier that companies have in entering the mobile search space is their mobile sites. In February, Google reported that 80% of the Fortune 500 companies have a mobile ready site. About two weeks ago, Google released a tool at HowToGoMo.com that shows companies what their Web site looks like when viewed on a mobile phone. Industry executives suggest that the average consumer stores about seven apps on their mobile phone. And while they might have an app for banking, they might not have an app for a specific retail brand. Companies need to give consumers choice. Slinger points to research that Google conducted with Compete on the use of mobile devices during the automotive research process. The goal was to get consumers into dealerships. About 34% of consumers use tablets throughout the research process, versus 30% on mobile devices. Still, 20% of consumers rely on tablets at the top of the purchase funnel -- compared with 22% on mobile phones -- to do research on cars. In the middle of the process, consumers use tablets 34% of the time and mobile phones 19% of the time. At the very end of the funnel, as consumers enter the buying process, 8% will rely on tablets versus 27% for mobile phones. Google and comScore data suggests that 68% of tablet owners use their device at least one hour per day, and 34% spend more time on their tablet, compared with watching TV. Brands may be missing an opportunity to integrate TV ads with search, based on devices such as Google TV and other Internet TV services. On Thursday, Google released Currents for devices running the Mountain View, Calif. company's Android software, along with Apple Inc.'s iPad and iPhone. The tool will compete with Yahoo's Livestand, which launched last month. Supporting a move to tablets, Google recently redesigned the app user interface to only serve up three search ads, similar to mobile phones. For advertisers, this huge change requires better optimization and paid-search strategy to deliver content above the fold. Brands must consider why consumers make purchases through an application or Web site and provide the tools to complete the transaction. Search marketers believe the "two-path option" works best. It removes the friction for completing the transaction. Slinger points to Amazon as an example. The company runs Google Sitelink in organic search results, giving consumers options to finish their transaction -- either by going to their Web site or app. Slinger declined to state the total number of search queries that Google sees through mobile, but said financial services generates about 15% of total queries on mobile phones. "Between 10% and 20% is a good number for most verticals," he said. Supporting search ads on mobile and tablets, brands should capture the growth in mobile by building out mobile and tablet-specific services. "About 25% to 35% do a good job supporting mobile specific sites," he said -- noting that the industry remains in the early days on tablets, but is farther along on mobile.
Imagine when that New Orleans-area car dealership initially heard of the trade that would send big NBA star Chris Paul from the New Orleans Hornets to the Los Angeles Lakers. This car dealer probably had a media schedule this season on the New Orleans Hornets cable channel, Cox Sports Television, radio outlet KMEZ, or both. "Oh, no. Might have to adjust those media buys now." But wait. Maybe things aren't so bad after all. NBA commissioner David Stern stepped in to kill the deal. Why? The theory is that this kind of trade hurts smaller NBA markets like New Orleans, while boosting bigger markets like Los Angeles. It could have been New York, Boston or Chicago. But it's not just small market teams that get hurt competitively -- it's those small market local advertisers who depend on strong local media platforms. But this sends a signal that any independent businesses owning sports teams -- at least in the NBA -- aren't truly independent when it comes to making personnel decisions. (The NBA is in the unusual position of owning the New Orleans team -- so how a decision was made to trade Chris Paul to the Lakers to begin with is a mystery). Sports leagues like balance -- and unpredictability. In theory, some of this balance gets addressed between seasons: The worst teams always have the better chance of getting amateur athletesthrough a draft. This helps teams and their leagues to achieve some balance -- as well as giving regional cable networks, TV and radio stations and high-paying local marketers a chance to get gain big viewer and fan interest. But you can go only so far. Smaller market owners sided with Stern's decision. The issue was at the root of the league's postponement of the season due to that prolonged, sometimes nasty labor/owner disagreement. Whether you are a team owner in Sacramento, Oklahoma City, Salt Lake City or New Orleans, you are trying to hold onto your growing stars -- many of whom, with plenty of money in their pockets, eventually seem to want to move to a big stage, where bigger TV marketing potential is in their interests. No team owner -- or surrogate owner -- wants to see lower team values due to lower TV ratings, and thus lower advertising revenues. Increasingly, sports clubs -- especially in the NBA -- have been claiming poverty. Many say they are money-losing operations partly because of big-star talent migration. Nothing in business is a guarantee -- unless of course a particular sports league claims it is a single autocratic operation that can decide when and where to move its employees to serve its business/marketing/advertising needs. But that doesn't sound like a fair, or interesting, game.