Textopoly Mobile Blog » Consumer Best Practices Guidelines http://blog.textopoly.com Setting the trend in mobile engagement Tue, 18 Oct 2011 06:56:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 en hourly 1 Pre-Emptive Audits & Off-the-Cuff Requirements http://blog.textopoly.com/2009/11/09/pre-emptive-audits-off-the-cuff-requirements/ http://blog.textopoly.com/2009/11/09/pre-emptive-audits-off-the-cuff-requirements/#comments Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:15:40 +0000 Naushad http://blog.textopoly.com/?p=302 “Why does it take so long to get a short code approved?” It’s the million dollar question we’re asked day after day, and the truthful answer is “it depends.” It depend on the type of service being applied for, as well on the individual Carrier. There is no uniform system or [...]]]> “Why does it take so long to get a short code approved?” It’s the million dollar question we’re asked day after day, and the truthful answer is “it depends.” It depend on the type of service being applied for, as well on the individual Carrier. There is no uniform system or guidelines in place from Carrier to Carrier which is quite unfortunate.

Delays in certification also arise when Carriers all of a sudden make up new requirements and last minute unreasonable requests.

Here are two recent occurrences that had us running in circles, throwing up our hands in utter disbelief and clinching our fists in a solemn swear that at least on a personal level we will never become users of this one particular Carrier. I won’t mention their name, but they are 1 of the top 4 in the U.S. For ease of reading we’ll just call them Queen Bee Mobile (QBM).

Pre-Emptive Audits:  A team member came to me the other day to tell me about an audit we received from QBM . The audit was scolding us for not having a reply message when the auditor had text the keyword STOP to one of our managed short codes. This is a concern, and I asked the team member why he was talking to me about the audit and not resolving the audit! We are MMA members, strict on consumer compliance and this is a serious issue. The team member calmly said to me “The code isn’t provisioned, which means we have no technical connection to QBM which means that we’re incapable of receiving the STOP request and incapable of sending a text message to QBM users!” Yes, we were audited on a code that was still undergoing the strenuous process of certification!  If you’re wondering how to solve pre-emptive audits give us a shout and we’ll fill you in. When I tell you the ends to which we had to travel to get this resolved you may want to stop doing mobile! (But don’t, it’s still a great space.)

Off-the-Cuff Requirements: Another recent client project required we apply for standard rate binary content, in this instance it was a wallpaper. After not hearing from QBM for 3 months, we receive an email with an Excel matrix of all QBM handsets, and a demand that we test the wallpaper download on each handset, tell QBM if it passed or failed, and provide the phone number to each of those handsets! Mind you, this requirement was not, and is still not documented.  When we asked where this rule came from and the reasoning behind it we were told that the rule was to enhance user experience. What?! How exactly would this requirement meet that goal? In order to meet this goal all call to actions, including TV, Radio, Online, etc would need to list each and every handset that are compatible. This is obviously not realistic and fails on far too many levels for me to bore you with.

I mean, can you imagine the print, radio and television nightmare!  And, where was this ‘rule’ 3 months ago when we applied for the code! Here’s the kicker, I told my Aggregator that my client that was going to do a wallpaper campaign is gone, because the process with QBM took too long. Thus, I didn’t want certification for binary download, just a standard rate SMS service which was also applied for at the same time.  Simple right? Wrong! In order to do that QBM would need a brand new application just for the SMS alert service, they can’t (i.e. won’t) certify 1 service if the application asked for 2 – oh, and the cherry on top, I have to pay an additional application fee.

Alas, all of our frustration, agony and diatribes are a waste since Carriers control their backyards and we’re the ones that are asking permission to play in them. It’s the ultimate example of the “golden rule” – he who has the gold makes all the rules.

When these situations come up and we’re deflated the one thing we remind ourselves is that even though mobile can be frustrating when dealing with the Carrier/bureaucratic side of it, the client side is a fabulous eco-system the brings true value to consumers, quantifiable return on investment to brands, and pushes all of us to continue innovation. I truly hope Carriers realize this and focus more on supporting us rather than waking up on the wrong side of the bed and pulling random rules out of their . . .thin air :)

]]> http://blog.textopoly.com/2009/11/09/pre-emptive-audits-off-the-cuff-requirements/feed/ 0 The Now Network is Now Specific http://blog.textopoly.com/2009/09/14/the-now-network-is-now-specific/ http://blog.textopoly.com/2009/09/14/the-now-network-is-now-specific/#comments Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:23:33 +0000 Karla http://blog.textopoly.com/?p=62

Sprint launched its new Compliancy Program in early July. Since then companies and agencies are scrambling through the Power Point and asking themselves if the Now Network is now too specific.

Sprint’s new attention to minor details and demands might be a bit too excessive for some. For example, the Mobile Marketing Association (MMA) regulation for [...]]]>

Sprint launched its new Compliancy Program in early July. Since then companies and agencies are scrambling through the Power Point and asking themselves if the Now Network is now too specific.

Sprint’s new attention to minor details and demands might be a bit too excessive for some. For example, the Mobile Marketing Association (MMA) regulation for an opt out message is phrased as “text STOP 2 stop”.  For Sprint users, however, the Carrier requires different language! This causes a small programming hiccup in that brands will need to setup the message flow for Sprint differently and since Sprint’s required language is longer than the MMA, Sprint users will be delivered less content from the brand. The larger issue with some of these new policies by Sprint is that the inconsistency of rules make our industry appear defragmented, conclusively making entering the mobile marketing world increasingly difficult and off putting.

In fact, specifications from the Now Network sometimes override the Consumer Best Practices (CPB) guidelines, a globally followed regulatory document created by the MMA. For example, the CBP guidelines state that renewal dates need not be mentioned (page 19), in the text to the user, Sprint demands its display (page 87).

Failure to follow these Now Network rules may lead to violations in Sprint’s Severity Violation System. This is a system where violations are rated 1 to 3, with 1 being major and 3 being minor. Violations lead to other unflattering procedures such as audits, which recently, Sprint has been dishing out quite generously. Some repeated violations may lead to termination of the short code.

All this leads me to ponder, if the majority of brands are already abiding by CBP guidelines, which are drafted by Aggregators, major Content Providers AND Carriers, will brands choose not to support Sprint as a participating carrier from their campaigns? I don’t think this will be case, but if individual Carriers begin drafting rules that conflict with what the Best Practices Guidelines say, then what is the value of that document? More importantly, when will the U.S. mobile market have consistency of services, programs, rules and regulations so that developers and spirited innovators can further push this exciting industry?

Although the Now Network may intend to create a more happy mobile world with its compliancy program, they must admit that their policies somewhat differ from the CPB and can potentially lead to some confusion and misdirection.

]]> http://blog.textopoly.com/2009/09/14/the-now-network-is-now-specific/feed/ 0