E Ink grabs majority share in SiPix for e-paper dominance

E Ink is grabbing a majority share of fellow e-paper maker SiPix Technology, the company has confirmed, and aims to snatch up 100-percent of shares in a deal worth around $50m. The agreement, which his expected to be  finalized by the end of the year, is part of E Ink’s aim to corner the e-paper market, and will see SiPix tech – including that of its SiPix Imagine subsidiary – integrated into future E Ink products.

E Ink is already found in the vast majority of ereaders, including the Kindle, NOOK, Sony Reader and more. However, that market has seen significant attack from the growing number of tablets such as Apple’s iPad, Amazon’s Kindle Fire and the new Google Nexus 7, with LCD displays proving more flexible for multimedia beyond text alone.

“Today, E Ink’s products are finding homes in a number of new applications which can be better served with the inclusion of SiPix’s products, technologies and intellectual property to our portfolio” Felix Ho, vice chairman of E Ink said of today’s deal. The company will initially include SiPix displays in the overall range it offers, but plans to integrate more of the behind-the-scenes technology – perhaps including slow video-capable e-paper - into future products.

That could also mean more use of e-paper in embedded environments, with E Ink keen to emphasize the low power consumption of its panels as ideal for its “E Ink On Every Smart Surface” strategy. Possibilities include tablet cases – such as Apple’s recent display-integrated Smart Cover concept - and other implementation where power supply could be insufficient or impractical for LCD or OLED.

Initially, E Ink will buy 82.7-percent of SiPix’s shares, though the goal is to buy 100-percent.

Read more >>

Tweet

Majority of cell phone owners still experience dropped calls, Pew poll finds

There’s no question that cell phones have made our lives easier, but they can also sometimes cause some pretty big headaches. Dropped calls, for instance, are always a major annoyance, and a new poll from the Pew Internet & American Life Project finds that the vast majority of cell phone users still find themselves dealing with them. 72% of respondents told Pew that they still experience dropped calls occasionally, which is a ridiculously large number of people when you consider how many of us own some kind of cell phone.

Of those people who answered in the affirmative, 32% said they suffer dropped calls multiple times per week or more frequently. Though we’ve only got 32% of polled cell phone users saying that they experience dropped calls frequently, the number that say dropped calls are still an issue is pretty staggering. Looking at the chart above, we can see that 6% of users say they deal with dropped calls on a daily basis, and another 6% say it happens multiple times per day, which we imagine is endlessly infuriating.

Elsewhere in Pew’s report, which was authored by Jan Lauren Boyles and Lee Rainie, 69% of users say that they occasionally receive unwanted marketing calls, with 25% of users claiming that it happens a few times per week. 79% of cell phone users say they text message, and 69% of those texters claim to occasionally receive spam messages. Finally, we come to mobile Internet download speeds. 55% percent of cell phone owners use their phones to access the Internet, and 77% of those mobile Internet users claim to be hit with “slow download speeds that prevent things from loading as quickly as they would like” every once in a while.

The sad news is that smartphone owners report these problems more frequently than “other cell owners.” Looking at the second chart from Pew, we see that smartphone owners report problems with dropped calls, unwanted calls and texts, and slow download speeds more often than the rest. Pew says that the poll took place during March and April 2012, and that the non-profit polled a total sample of 2,254 adults to get these rather interesting results. At least now you know that you aren’t the only one suffering when you experience a dropped call, right?

Read more >>

Tweet

Majority of Marketers Plan to Increase Mobile Budgets in 2013

A new study found 70% of marketers plan to increase budgets for mobile in 2013. But is this really necessary?

Scott Forshay, a mobile and emerging technology strategist for emarketing company Acquity Group, tells Mashable that mobile marketers do not need to increase their budgets, but rather should get smarter about their mobile strategies. In fact, budgets for mobile marketing could stay the same if more effective mobile campaigns are created.

“A lot of brands have spent far too much money on mobile applications,” he said

This year, mobile ad spending in the U.S. is expected to reach $2.6 billion. That includes spending on display, search and messaging-based formats. And another estimate shows mobile advertising on smartphones will be a $5.04 billion industry by 2015.

“Of that $2.6 billion spent, $2.5 [billion] of that was probably wasted,” Forshay said.

Brands are shifting their focus to on-the-go consumers who are attached to their mobile devices. And for good reason. “Our entire lives are stored on our smartphones,” he said. From photos to calendars to personal data — giving marketers a great opportunity to reach people like never before. But they have to do it right.

“Probably the biggest error brands have made as they venture into mobile is that they think mobile is the same thing they’re doing for the website, just down to a 4-inch form,” he said. In the past, ads have been unavoidable for consumers — billboards target people stuck in traffic (same with radio commercials), and TV ads were something viewers had to deal with to watch their favorite shows. Mobile is an entirely different medium where users don’t have to endure ads or marketing in most instances.

SEE ALSO: 3 Mobile Platforms Your Brand Should Leverage

“Mobile users are not tethered to a desktop. They need timely information to drive them into stores with positive purchase intent,” he said. Marketing on mobile devices will need to be timely, personal and contextually relevant (people expect their phone to be customized to who they are), in order to work.

But not all companies need apps, says Forshay.

“I think that apps work perfectly for some types of brands,” he said. “However, some companies jumped into branding too quickly just to keep up with the trend. Where I think apps can really provide value to consumers is when they provide functional utility.”

Forshay pointed to The Tiffany & Co. Engagement Ring Finder app as an example of smart marketing. The app helps men find rings. Since men are typically the customer of engagement rings, the app is designed to help easily navigate and create a ring.

“What they’ve done very effectively is not only the ability to view the catalog, but they took it a step further and provided a really functional piece — a jewelry sizer.” Men can sneak into their girlfriend’s jewelry box, grab a ring, place it on the smartphone screen while the app is in use and it can figure out her ring size. With GPS, users of the Tiffany & Co. app are directed to the nearest store.

“What they’ve done is taken a potentially anxiety-riden situation, and they’ve taken a lot of the guesswork out of that,” he said.

Brands that understand who is shopping and what problems they can address for the consumer are successful, Forshay added. He suggests brands take a step back to find out who their consumers are, if they’re using smartphones, and if the majority are using iOS or Android.

He also didn’t see much value in banner ads on things like Zynga games and some apps, citing the “fat finger principal.” In some studies, he says, it’s been shown that up to 76% of clicks on mobile banner ads are caused by an accidental touch.

Brands will have to get smarter “otherwise they’ll alienate their audience base.”

The study was conduced by StrongMail, an email marketing company, and presented by eMarketer. The survey gathered feedback from 802 business executives in a wide range of industries.

What’s the best mobile marketing strategy you’ve seen? Tell us in the comments.

Image courtesy of iStockphoto, TommL

Read more >>

Tweet