Arthur Goldstuck of World Wide Worx shared some very important data about the South African mobile internet at yesterday’s NetProphet conference. Sponsor White Wall Web did a brief summary, and here is some additional information from my own notes*:

First up, a useful set of distinctions between different tiers of “the mobile internet” in South Africa:

  • Tier 1: The WAP internet (used to download ringtones, wallpapers, etc). There are about 15m WAP-capable phones in SA right now, and about 14m actual users.
  • Tier 2: The Mobile application internet (covering Mxit, Facebook, Twitter etc). There are about 15m MXIT accounts, but a very high proportion of people have downloaded the application then never used it. There are probably 10.56 m actual users (Arthur’s latest figures).
  • Tier 3: Mobile web browsing – consciously using the internet. This accounts for around 4m people at most.

So if you’re after “the mobile internet market” in South Africa, who do you target? Understanding the difference between these three tiers of use is important, but you also need to know who’s actually spending money, on what.

The Mobility 2009/10 survey sampled urban mobile users and revealed two categories of interest:

  1. The “Elephants” (about 10% of the total): These are high spenders, but their mobile use is unsophisticated – they tend to have high-performance phone with lots of features they don’t use (Arthur put this down to lack of knowledge – I’m not sure; preferences and the availability of other means of access probably also have a lot to do with it). Only 12% of Elephants use their phones to access the internet – if they do use the internet, they prefer to do so at home. Their use of mobile applications is lower than the average for all users. In short — this is not a viable target market for mobile applications. (I suspect this is the market segment I fall into: my iPhone is nice, but frankly I find it easier to use Twitter, etc on my Macbook).
  2. The “Sophisticats” (about 9% of the total): Also high spenders, AND also very sophisticated in their use of their phones. They are more likely to access the internet on their phones than at home, and 52% of them vs just 19% of the Elephants can download applications on their phones.

The Sophisticats are your market, then. Don’t even think of trying to sell mobile apps to the whole country — South Africa may have 38 million mobile users (that’s actual users, not SIM cards), but it’s not a targetable market.

Things get even more interesting when you start comparing this market segmentation with the results of another survey World Wide Worx ran on schoolchildren in Gauteng, comparing the digital sophistication of 1400 private school vs 300 township school learners. The learners were asked to rate their own level of skill in various areas of PC and mobile phone use, with revealing and often surprising results:

  • 85% of private school kids vs 20% of township kids rate themselves “advanced” at general use of PCs; the comparable figures for using Windows are 85% vs 42%.
  • The kids rated their parents as less advanced than themselves, with the gap largest for township learners, suggesting that the support structure of parents and teachers is important.
  • Parents and teachers think learners are a lot less advanced than the learners themselves think they are (just 53% of private school teachers rated their students advanced). That’s not just an artefact of boasting by the kids, either – they didn’t uniformly rate themselves good at everything, but presented a nuanced and believable picture of skill that varied across applications. (I’d still like to be sure that adults and learners were using the same definition of “advanced”, though – might learners not be honest but mistaken in estimating their own skill?).
  • When it comes to general internet use, 85% of private school vs 30% of township school learners rate themselves advanced.
  • The more specific the question, the narrower the gap gets: 44% of township learners rate themselves advanced Google users; for LiveSearch the figure is 22%, for Wolfram Alpha it’s 10% and for Ask Jeeves it’s 8%.
  • 84% of private school vs 36% of township learners rate themselves advanced Facebook users.
  • And how’s this: 45% of township kids rate themselves advanced at downloading multimedia content, and 32% at editing it.
  • The gap narrows even further when it comes to cellphones: 46% of township learners rate themselves advanced at browsing the net on their phones, 38% at using email, 69% at using SMS and 67% at MXIT.
  • Of private school learners, 76% rated rated themselves advanced at browsing the net on their phones, 90% at SMS and 64% at MXIT.
  • MXIT’s lower cost clearly gives it an edge among township learners!

None of this, says Goldstuck, suggests that any of these kids are “born digital-ready”. The big secret, rather, is peer group learning: once their peers latch onto a new app, kids adopt it very fast. The big spike in Facebook use once they get to university reflects this. And there’s a problem: younger kids who are learning the Internet via Facebook think it IS the internet – outside its walled garden, they’re clueless.

It’s not about your age, though; it’s about what your digital peer group is doing and talking about. The message for those hoping to build a business for this market? Build digital peer group learning into both your development model and your business model.
—————-

*All errors, omissions and misrepresentations purely mine. If you find any, please feel free to correct me.

{ 1 comment }

There’s a very interesting post up at Psyblog about the cocktail party effect, the remarkable ability we humans have to tune into just one thread of input among many others — and tune OUT all the rest.

The most famous demonstration of this probably “did you see the moonwalking bear?” (watch it if you haven’t) — but as Psyblog points out, we probably miss much more important things all the time, while we’re paying attention to something else. The researcher who first demonstrated this effect, Colin Cherry, did it by playing two different messages simultaneously, one through each side of a pair of headphones. People had no difficulty following the stream they were asked to pay attention to, but:

Cherry found his participants picked up surprisingly little information presented to the other, ‘rejected ear’, often failing to notice blatant changes to the unattended message. When asked afterwards, participants:

  • could not identify a single phrase from the speech presented to the rejected ear.
  • weren’t sure the language in the rejected ear was even English.
  • failed to notice when it changed to German.
  • mostly didn’t notice when the speech to the rejected ear was being played backwards (though some did report that it sounded a bit strange).

The Somebody Else’s Problem Field is another example of the same phenomonen. (I know there are several very strong SEP fields active in my house right now, rendering various things that sort-of need to be done effectively invisible — what about yours?)

The interesting question, of course, is what this means for the vaunted Attention Economy. Why are we tuned into the streams we are, and what might we be missing? PsyBlog promises a series on attention, which I will pay attention to.

{ 0 comments }

What outrageous thing will you do today?

March 23, 2009

Here is a lovely, life-affirming idea from Gloria Steinem:

I will claim today’s pavement seed-gathering expedition with my children as my first outrageous act. And tomorrow I will plan an unrealistically ambitious fundraising campaign for Rape Crisis Cape Town.
What will you do? Ideas and feedback welcomed here and at Feministing.

Read the full article →

Upgrade your bullsh*t detector: learning from “Twitter Unveils New Premium Accounts”

March 19, 2009

It’s been an amusing morning watching the waves caused in the Twitterverse by Brian Brigg’s satirical post on Twitter’s business model. A LOT of people passed the news on without any apparent awareness that it was satire. There was concern and even outrage at the idea of 500-character tweets. Some people were doing it [...]

Read the full article →

WordCamp SA roundup

August 24, 2008

My edited notes from WordCamp SA in Cape Town yesterday. The roundup of live Twitter coverage is here.
Vince Maher on the M&G’s blogs:

Thought Leader worked because it has created a platform for “attention transactions” – writers are willing to trade their time and effort for attention, looking for peer recognition.
With that as [...]

Read the full article →

A brand is what people think it is

May 13, 2008

I never formally studied marketing; I came into it via a complicated route that involved, somewhere at the beginning, reading a lot of eye-wateringly complex philosophy (Quine, anyone?). All that language about language, combined with a certain natural skepticism, has led me to spend a lot of time pondering the sometimes very large gaps between [...]

Read the full article →

“But honestly, would social media really work for my plumbing / building / aromatherapy business?”

May 12, 2008

I get this question a lot. It’s a question I ask of myself a lot, as well. I’m betting on the answer being yes, with some caveats depending on exactly who and where your target market is and what the best way might be to reach them. My “yes” is not yet authoritative, but it’s [...]

Read the full article →

A golden rule: Make good stuff, listen, be nice

April 17, 2008

The second day of Nomadic Marketing was considerably more difficult that the first (in a good way); a huge diversity of content, style, opinion and perspective. But if there’s one message that’s emerging clearly from absolutely everyone it’s that the rules of success in social media are not very different from the rules of success [...]

Read the full article →

Roundup of Nomadic Marketing 3, Day 1

April 16, 2008

The first day of Nomadic Marketing has been interesting and challenging in unexpected ways. On the one hand I’ve not encountered anything particularly new — in fact, one of the biggest surprises was discovering that the idea of markets as conversations is not universally accepted as blindingly obvious. Listening to various stories of corporate obliviousness [...]

Read the full article →

Transfixed by a storm in a teacup very far away

March 10, 2008

I was about to go to bed last night when I picked up a comment on Twitter that suggested there was something interesting going on at the SXSWi conference* in Austin, Texas, where Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg was being interviewed live on stage by a journalist called Sarah Lacy. The story in a [...]

Read the full article →