Google's 3 Wireless Advertising Patent Applications, branding, advertising, and subsidizing Options

[bragadocchio]

There's been a lot of discussion on the web about Google working with San Francisco to provide wireless access to people in that area, and some speculation that Google will bring that effort to other places, too.

One aspect of this effort that hasn't gotten a lot of attention is how the access might be paid for.

Some recent articles and blog posts have noted a Google Patent application that describes a way of advertising through this wireless access. Actually, there were three patent applications from Google published on the same day that involve Google, wireless access, and advertising.

The documents are pretty straightforward, and don't need a lot of interpretation, but they do provide an insight into how providing such access can make it easier for people to connect to the internet, and also be a money maker for the folks at Mountain View.

It's a nice trilogy of patent applications.

This one focuses upon providing wireless access

Method and system to provide wireless access at a reduced rate

Filed on September 14, 2004, and published on March 16th, the inventors of document number 20060059043 are Wesley T. Chan, Shioupyn Shen, and Georges Harik.

Abstract:

Methods and system for providing wireless access at a reduced rate. In one embodiment, access to a WAP is provided to an end-user at a rate subsidized by a first entity. The first entity includes advertisements in an end-user view.

This one goes into some detail on integrating advertising into the service to pay for it:

Method and system to provide advertisements based on wireless access points

Also filed on September 14, 2004 and published March 16, 2006, the inventors of document number 20060059044 are Wesley T. Chan, Shioupyn Shen, and Georges Harik.

Abstract:

Methods and system to provide advertisements in a view of an end user accessing a wireless access point. The advertisements are related to the WAP based on a predetermined criterion.

This last one looks at how branding can be done in conjunction with providing wireless access:

Method and system for dynamically modifying the appearance of browser screens on a client device

Filed on September 15, 2004, and published March 16, 2006, the inventors of document number 20060058019 are Wesley T. Chan and Shioupyn Shen.

Abstract

In one embodiment, a connection of a client device to a wireless access point is identified. Further, the appearance of a screen presented on the client device is modified to reflect the brand associated with a provider of the wireless access point.

Taken together, these point to a plan that may attract other municipalities and areas to work with Google to provide wireless internet access. The idea seems to be a good one.

But, how much access can advertising money provide, and will there be a risk of advertising oversaturating the attraction of getting on the web? Can free wireless access increase the number of folks venturing online in significant numbers?

[dgeary9]

The ad saturation question is a really interesting one for me. I think that some of the most valuable target markets (like young, web savvy users with disposable income) have long since learned to basically ignore most ads. That leaves two choices - 1) come up with more "noticeable" ads, or 2) target different markets.

I was surprised watching my father surf the web. He's a well educated early retiree who used the web at work - and he reads everything text on a page and basically ignores the pictures (kind of like reading a newspaper/magazine). Ads annoy him, but he reads a lot of them - at least the text based ones. He doesn't have the same skill I have acquired of "scanning" a page. He basically reads left to right from the top to the bottom of the page. And then when some of the more "noticeable" ads show up (you know, the weather.com kind), he tends to abandon the site because he can't figure out how to turn them off.

So I wonder whether ad driven WiFi will mostly end up targeting users who don't spend enough time online to have developed ad "blinkers"? It wouldn't be the first time, that's how most direct mail and telemarketing has evolved.

[AbleReach]

Targeting advertising based on wireless access points would be a quick "in" to local markets, including a potential tie-in to major newspapers and chain stores. Local relationships could further Google's aspriation of tie-ins to print markets. Locally targeted ads could take advantage of the tendency to research online and purchase at a brick and mortar. Ads could be framed almost as public service - there are a lot of us who scan grocery ads before making a shopping list.

Will Google develop wifi ads that take advantage of an ad market for smaller, local, brick-and-mortar shops, giving locally-focused, adsense-funded web publishers a boost in income? I doubt that Google will tell us exactly what they're up to, but you know that as soon as marketers are tracking ROI there will be studies of results stemming from what Google seems to be doing. Seeing those stats will be exciting.

I think it's a smart move, though I have trouble following the legal logic on why logic is patentable. OK, I know, what they're doing is patenting the method of implementing the logic (I think, lol,) but, still...

[TheManBehindTheCurtain]

And if you think that's something, consider the complementary work they're doing on the mobile device front as well. A couple of months ago, at the local WebGuild meeting, a Google product manager for their mobile services spoke. He didn't reveal specific plans, but between him and the other (non-Google) speakers there were some very 1984 ideas floating around.

Of course, there are the obvious ideas, like your cell phone or PDA being able to tell you where to find the nearest Peet's Coffee, or list the showtimes for Casablanca at the extraordinary Stanford Theatre. But imagine walking down the street and your cell phone alerting you to the fact that the bookstore around the corner has just received that novel you wanted in paperback. Or the Starbucks you're walking by offers you a discount on a Caramel Macchiato because it knows you're a Peets devotee. Scary stuff.

Bottom line is that I think Google is emerging as an innovative and aggressive technology company. They have a long way to go, however, and their biggest asset right now is the potential people and investors see in them rather than the actual value they're delivering in terms of products. It will be fascinating to see how much of this stuff they can really bring to market before the cash they got in their IPO dries up and the luster begins to fade with investors. I wish them luck.

This post has been edited by FrankElley: Mar 26 2006, 09:34 PM

[bragadocchio]

If you've seen the movie, Minority Report, some of the ideas coming out about mobile and wireless remind me a little of that movie, and things like retina scans triggering ads there.

In the yearly financial statements from Google (1995), they include risks associated with running the search engine.

One risk listed is that they no longer appear innovative, and loss the support of some of their many customer evangelists.

If we do not continue to innovate and provide products and services that are useful to users, we may not remain competitive, and our revenues and operating results could suffer.

Another is that they are seen as being too intrusive when it comes to privacy and security issues.

Privacy concerns relating to our technology could damage our reputation and deter current and potential users from using our products and services.

Seems to me that there's a middle path between those two concerns about the size of a tightrope, and they are walking on it.

[booyahtribe]

I think it's a smart move, though I have trouble following the legal logic on why logic is patentable. OK, I know, what they're doing is patenting the method of implementing the logic (I think, lol,) but, still... blink.gif

I definitely agree with ablereach here. As I was going over the patent applications, while I didn't expect something revolutionary, they were barely evolutionary. Ok, they'll provide wifi access for displaying ads--hey Mom, it's a glorified, targeted "Netzero" type ad in exchange for free access! (remember those?) Could Netzero have patented the logic: "free internet access for displaying ads"? The logic is the same, but the technology is different. But I guess I shouldn't be too surprised in a world where Ebay is still battling the "Buy it Now" feature (Court hearing today btw). *sigh*

[bragadocchio]

Welcome to the forums, booyahtribe.

Ebay is still battling the "Buy it Now" feature (Court hearing today btw).

Yes, I'm keeping my eyes on that one. Excellent place to mention it.

These are still in the "application" stage, and I'm hoping that they are obvious enough that they don't make it to the point of being granted.

"We're going to show local ads to people who use local wireless. And we're going to pay for the local wireless so that they see our ads. And we're going to use some branding features to help pay for that access, when we provide these local ads."

It is a better way of geo-targeting than basing ads on the IP address that someone uses (from their provider's point of access on the web), but it doesn't make me think that it's anything exciting or new. It just seems like an obvious next step. Evolution instead of revolution, to use your words.