CPaaS

Mobilesquared are messaging specialists, and that is why we have split out as many messaging channels as possible within our CPaaS modelling.

Our data is based on extensive research over an on-going period, starting back in 2010, and has continued ever since. Between September 2020 to October 2022 we interviewed/surveyed/received data from almost 330 companies (163 mobile operators and mobile operator groups, and 167 messaging ecosystem companies, including aggregators, CSPs, solutions providers, firewall providers, and regulators) covering all business messaging. In addition, specific CPaaS data and insight across all 14 CPaaS channels has been generated from CPaaS-only related research based on interviews, discussions and online surveys with 113 companies, a large % of which we had already spoken to for the messaging research, but also CPaaS specialists not from a messaging background.            

Mobilesquared developed online surveys for each business messaging channel and CPaaS, running continuously via the company website, and promoted to our research database and relevant industry contacts, as well as garner the support from trade bodies such as the Mobile Ecosystem Forum. Across every business messaging channel and CPaaS survey, participants are asked to answer for all regions where they operate, and identify the key markets for them. Each survey typically asks the respondent to identify channels used, traffic levels, expected growth, traffic split by market vertical and use case, spend, unit pricing, and unit pricing change. It is worth noting, that each survey is also tailored to that specific channel or channels (in the case of CPaaS).

Mobilesquared updates its business messaging forecasts (and non-messaging channels included in CPaaS) on an annual basis, with minor updates occurring on an ad hoc basis throughout the year.

Our industry research is supplemented by consumer research and enterprise research, both of which are updated on an ad hoc basis.

The consumer research included in CPaaS is based on the views of 10,000 consumers in 10 markets (Australia, Colombia, France, Germany, Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, Spain, UK, US), conducted between November 2021 and February 2022.

The brand data included in the CPaaS report is based on data supplied by CPaaS providers, which has then been aggregated and anonymised.  

Once all of the research process is complete, the messaging data and insight is then processed, anonymised and aggregated (where there is input from multiple sources), modelled and sense-checked, and applied (where applicable) to the following business messaging channels; A2P SMS, RCS, MMS, WhatsApp Business, Apple Messages for Businesses, Facebook Messenger, OTT messaging apps, and Viber.

This process has been repeated for the non-messaging channels included in our CPaaS datasets, however, the data has greater reliance on information and insight shared during the interview process, and the data shared in our online CPaaS survey – which had 75 respondents.

 

CPaaS forecast methodology

Our forecasts are based on a top-down, bottom-up methodology. Revenues for the top 38 CPaaS providers (as identified by Mobilesquared) are based on published revenues for 2019/20 and 2021 from the CPaaS provider either directly or from a reputable third-party, up to the end of 2Q 2022.

Mobilesquared has modelled this data on our market growth projections to generate CPaaS provider revenues for the remainder of the forecast period based on each company’s channel offering, customer base and growth, geographical reach, and company data (where applicable). Mobilesquared has also applied market research, market information and insight shared during the 18-24 month research process when modelling each company’s projected revenues.

In addition, to complete our total view of the CPaaS landscape, we have assumed the 80:20 rule, with 80% of total CPaaS revenues being generated from these 38 CPaaS, and the remaining 20% of revenues coming from the long tail of smaller, national-based CPaaS providers appearing in markets around the world.

Given that Mobilesquared is a messaging specialist, we then segmented our CPaaS forecasting process into messaging-based, and non-messaging based. For the messaging channels, Mobilesquared has applied its existing market forecasts for both traffic and spend to the CPaaS data. Details of each messaging channel methodology is outlined below.

With our total global view of CPaaS spend and growth forecasts created, we then applied the relevant messaging data spend to the CPaaS global spend. To segment the remaining global spend, we applied our CPaaS research to break out the spend by non-messaging channel and by market. This process was based purely on the data provided via the online survey from the 75 respondents and sense-checked during the 1-2-1 interviews.

Where total non-CPaaS global market spend per channel has been included (i.e. Voice, Email, Video, Social media, WebRTC, and In-app push notifications), figures included in the report are based on third-party data from Statista, F&F Research, IAB, MMA, Brandessenceresearch, Data Library Research, as well as anonymised third-party data from research participants. Where there is multiple global forecast datapoints per channel, Mobilesquared has taken an average. Mobilesquared has then applied the CPaaS research to take a % of the global spend to apply to channel spend within CPaaS. The online survey data has then been applied to segment further by country.

Mobilesquared has calculated CPaaS traffic by applying a global average cost per action to each channel. “Action” has been used throughout the CPaaS report as an umbrella term to cover a voice call, video, social media brand advert, promotion or update, a single in-app push notification, an email, even a single message and so on. Voice traffic has been calculated by applying a global average cost per call to a contact centre to the total spend. For all other non-messaging channels, with the commercial model for these channels based on a licensing model encompassing a set number of actions sent to a pre-determined sized database per month, Mobilesquared has calculated an average cost-per action based on available market pricing data from the major CPaaS providers, and where required, from the major non-CPaaS providers, i.e. company specialists in each sector.

CPaaS users are based on how each user can access every service. Mobilesquared has assumed that the smartphone and feature-rich non-smartphones have the capability of accessing all 14 channels, and have formed the basis of our CPaaS users. In each market we have applied 100% of smartphone users + a % of non-smartphone users.      

When calculating the average spend per channel per user, and average traffic (action) per channel per user, Mobilesquared has applied the CPaaS user total. It is important to note, that this figure will greatly differ compared to if the average spend per channel per user, and average traffic (action) per channel per user was Viber or RCS/RBM and based on Viber or RCS/RBM only users respectively, for example.

Please note, this is Mobilesquared’s first view of the CPaaS marketplace. While we are confident that our data and forecasts accurately reflect the data and insights shared during the insight process, we acknowledge that as we get more visibility into the CPaaS providers (those included in this report and those yet to feature) we will amend our forecasts accordingly. Mobilesquared views this as an on-going process, in much the same way we have done so with A2P SMS, RCS, and WhatsApp Business, and now viewed as the leading provider of business messaging (and CPaaS) intelligence.

 

A2P SMS forecast methodology updated for CPaaS      

Based on Mobilesquared’s research, we have assumed that 62% of total A2P SMS global spend was via a CPaaS provider in 2020, rising to 71.7% in 2022, and 77.19% in 2026, for each year of the forecast period we have then weighted this accordingly to the size and projected growth of each market when applying SMS traffic and spend to our CPaaS data.             

The A2P SMS data included in CPaaS is based on data modelling (traffic or pricing), whereby Mobilesquared takes an average where two or more sources of actual market data were available. Across the 200 markets tracked by Mobilesquared, forecasts by market are based on an average of 18 data points. As a result of the greater input, we have been able to model each of the 200 markets individually for market size, split of international and domestic traffic, and growth over 2019, 2020 into 2021, and throughout the forecast period. However, only total white route traffic has been included as CPaaS traffic, and is the total of the relevant domestic and international traffic terminated in that market.

Average A2P SMS pricing and pricing forecasts for the 200 markets covered (termination and wholesale rates) are based on country-by-country information obtained from mobile operators, mobile operator groups, aggregators, cloud service providers, and hubs.  

Traffic and traffic growth forecasts for the 200 markets covered are based on our ongoing interviews, discussions and online surveys, and data shared by respondents, looking at total volumes of authorised traffic (white route traffic), and the number of messages received per subscriber per month.              

Pricing data applied to A2P SMS traffic used in the CPaaS dataset was received from multiple sources – including both discount and premium messaging providers, as well as operators and operating groups.        

All monetary values show the actual income for each part of the value chain – mobile operator or aggregator. Total spend is what a brand pays for messaging with the income from that then split (where appropriate) between mobile operator and aggregator.    

White route revenues are calculated based on varying small degrees of direct spend, according to our ongoing interviews, discussions and research (including detailed survey information conducted in 2021 and 2022).

Aggregator white route revenues are calculated based on the difference between the average termination and wholesale rate per market.

RCS Communication Services (RCS) business messaging (RBM) forecast methodology updated for CPaaS                

In the CPaaS data Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of the traffic and spend is via a CPaaS provider.

RCS modelling scenarios are based on our understanding of the expected rollout of RCS services and estimated monthly active users (MAU) from the GSMA. Mobilesquared aligned rollout and MAU information with the level of smartphone penetration per market, the smartphone operating system market share and expected availability of RCS clients in relevant devices.

Mobilesquared has only applied the RBM total traffic and total spend to the CPaaS data.        

The starting point for Mobilesquared’s RBM traffic forecasts is the underlying A2P SMS traffic that we believe is most at risk from migration to RBM. In essence, this is the marketing & promotion traffic pushed out over white routes – that is to say official, billable business messaging.

Marketing & promotions constitute roughly 28% of all white route A2P SMS traffic, and it is this type of traffic that we have initially modelled to migrate to RBM – where mobile operators have launched RCS, to network subscribers that have an RCS device client, and where brands and businesses have initiated RBM programs.

We have also presumed that the remaining 72% (predominantly alerts, reminders, and security messages) will largely remain on A2P SMS over the forecast period.

Our engagement and spend data does not include the expected movement of voice-based and in-app customer care onto RBM. This will be available in 2023.

Live RCS networks and registered P2P users are based on ongoing research of the RCS ecosystem by Mobilesquared. A2P users are based on the reported launch of RCS Business Messaging services and device client availability in relevant markets.

P2P and A2P RCS network forecasts and MAU forecasts are based on Mobilesquared research encompassing expected mobile-operator group rollouts, the expansion of competition in more mature markets, the availability of device clients and the launch of business messaging services by relevant mobile operators.

The Google impact on RBM methodology

The biggest change to our previous forecasts is a result of changes in the way Google is now addressing RBM. Firstly, Samsung is migrating its RCS messaging client to Googles Android messages. This will happen by the end of 2021. Although this removes some of the device fragmentation which had previously impacted interconnection, Google will no longer support interconnection of Android Messages users with Open RCS MAAPs – that is to say MAAPs provided by the likes of Mavenir and WIT. Notable exceptions are T-Mobile, Vodafone, and the Telefonica properties in Europe. Any other operators using an Open RCS MAAP will no longer be able to connect to Google Android Messages users by the end of 2021, other than inviting them to download and use the relevant client.

Where operators are using an Open RCS MAAP, and have either launched A2P services, or plan to, we have reduced relevant user numbers in line with Google’s new stance.      

Moreover, in markets where Google has launched Guest A2P services, it could be actively competing with the MNOs. Guest A2P was launched in nine markets at the end of 2020 – namely Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, Mexico, Spain, the UK, and USA.

We have also presumed that, in future, Google will activate Guest A2P services in markets with more than 2 million registered users that achieve more than 25% penetration.              

Income from Google Guest RBM should be split between Google and Aggregators, rather than the MNOs and Aggregators.            

Our total RBM engagement forecasts are made up of four components, although only total events and total sessions have been included in the CPaaS data. Nevertheless, in the background our RBM engagements are made up of: 

1. Event-based A2P – one-off pushes to an opted-in marketing database, including promotions & marketing and customer service updates
2. Session-based A2P – a business-originated message that leads to a conversational flow of messages between consumer and business which may ultimately involve replacement of other A2P SMS traffic (e.g. customer service updates and notifications)
3. Event-based P2A – a consumer-originated message that leads to a single reply from business which may ultimately involve replacement of other A2P SMS traffic (e.g. customer service updates and notifications)
4. Session-based P2A – a consumer-originated message that leads to a conversational flow of messages between consumer and business which may ultimately involve replacement of other A2P SMS traffic (e.g. promotions & marketing, customer service updates, and notifications).

As stated previously, traffic volumes for both session-based A2P and P2A messaging show only the actual number of messages sent by a brand or business to the consumer. However, in terms of billing, we have assumed the brand or business will be charged for all messages contained in any given session at a ratio of 2:5 – that is to say that the brand or business will be charged the cost of terminating an average of two RCS messages for every five exchanged, averaged up or down depending on the number of messages exchanged.

A single push message to consumers would be charged in the same way as SMS – at 1 x the cost of terminating an RCS message.             

Mobilesquared has assumed that the average RCS termination rate has now increased from SMS x 115% to SMS x 130%, although there are different pricing models adopted by different operators. We have used actual pricing where we are aware.        

We have forecast RMB spend for the key players in the value chain – not revenues. For example, if an RBM termination rate was US$1.00 – a mobile operator would retain 100% of the spend if selling direct to a brand or business, and the wholesale cost if selling to a messaging provider or aggregator. The messaging provider or aggregator would retain the difference between termination cost and wholesale cost – plus a mark-up.             

Our spend forecasts are solely based on the delivery of RBM, and do not include any value-added services delivered by an aggregator, messaging or marketing platform – such as service notifications, reporting or integration with business applications, or distribution fees charged by an aggregator to a messaging or marketing platform.

Spend and income is based on commercial campaigns and does not include trials.

 

WhatsApp Business forecast

In the CPaaS data Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of the traffic and spend is via a CPaaS provider.

For the purposes of our CPaaS data, we have only used the WhatsApp Business API model, which is based on predominantly medium and large enterprises which are using APIs provided by WhatsApp Business partners. All of our CPaaS data excludes traffic from the WhatsApp Business App, which is a free service for predominantly micro and small businesses.

Mobilesquared researched and found business-size information for 127 of the 195 countries covered by WhatsApp in WhatsApp Business report and dataset (separate to CPaaS) – split between micro (1-9), small (10-49), medium (50-249) and large (>250). Where business-size information was unavailable, we estimated the total number of businesses based on regional averages per head of population and then split by the average percentages for micro, small, medium and large businesses. In the CPaaS data, we have only used the medium and large business data.

The total number of businesses which are using WhatsApp Partner APIs is based on surveys of the Partners starting in the first quarter of 2020, and last updated in 1Q 2022. By the end of 2020, we estimate almost 2,000 companies had engaged with partners, rising to almost 3,000 in 2021, and over 10,000 in 2025.       

Total WhatsApp user numbers, and total WhatsApp user forecasts, are based on various public announcements dating back to December 2013 – most recently crossing 1.5 billion in February 2018, 2 billion in February 2020, and 2.7 billion in December 2022.

Historical WhatsApp users were calculated for each year-end and benchmarked against total smartphone penetration to assess actual, and smartphone-penetration, growth trends. WhatsApp user and penetration numbers were then researched and collated for the individual countries and regions contained in our forecasts. Where country information was not available, estimates were benchmarked against regional WhatsApp smartphone penetration.

Country and regional users were then aligned with the global total, and forecast throughout the period based on actual registered users, unique users, smartphone-penetration, and growth trends.

Mobilesquared applied enterprise survey data conducted during 2019-21, to ascertain the average size of the customer database for medium and large enterprises. We also applied consumer survey data conducted during 2019-22, to ascertain the average number of times a consumer would message a brand each year.

In addition, 1-2-1 interviews with WhatsApp Business partners, have provided Mobilesquared with traffic levels on a per country basis, dependent on where each company operates.

Taken together, the data together formed the basis of calculations for all P2A engagement, as well as A2P broadcast messages sent by WhatsApp for Business app users, and A2P template messages sent by Partner API users. We have assumed an average of five messages will be exchanged in both A2P and P2A conversations – 2.5 each from consumer and enterprise. We have assumed a response rate of 30% (starting in 2018) to A2P messages which, in turn, lead to conversational sessions. However, please note, only total traffic and total sessions have been included in the CPaaS data.  

Our survey of WhatsApp Partners indicated that approximately 10% of total API traffic constituted A2P templates at the end of 2020. We have assumed this will rise to around 23% by the end of the forecast period due to the apparent interest from enterprise in sending updates and reminders verified by WhatsApp, and relaxation of rules on A2P messaging in September, 2021.           

WhatsApp increased the rates it charges for A2P template messages sent via its APIs in February 2022. Simultaneously, WhatsApp also started charging brands per conversation, regardless of whether the conversation is initiated by the brand (A2P), or the consumer (P2A). Each key territory (as identified by Meta) has a “business-initiated rate” (A2P), and a “user-initiated rate” (P2A), which Mobilesquared has applied to each market.

The cost of a consumer-originated conversation is less than a brand-originated conversation. Meanwhile, WhatsApp Partners all appear to have different pricing strategies and price points for both P2A and A2P messaging.      

Some WhatsApp Partners charge a flat monthly admin fee, some do not. Some include a P2A message volume within the fee, some do not. Some charge per user, some per message, and most seem to charge differing message rates – although their rates apply to both P2A conversations and A2P templates. 

We have based our WhatsApp Business methodology on the guidelines and regulations determined by Meta, which can be accessed here https://developers.facebook.com/docs/whatsapp               

 

Viber forecast methodology

For the purposes of the CPaaS data, Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of Viber’s business messaging activity is applicable to CPaaS and delivered via CPaaS provider. Only total traffic and spend have been included in the CPaaS data.

The data and assumptions contained in the Viber dataset (separate to CPaaS) were compiled from exhaustive research, interviews and surveys conducted from September 2021 to June 2022.

The addressable market is based on monthly active users – not unique IDs as reported by Rakuten, Viber’s parent company. Monthly active users (MAUs) were modelled on public statements from Viber over the past five years.

We have assumed a significant reduction in the volume of 2022 business messaging traffic in the Ukraine (one of Viber’s largest markets) as a result of the Russian invasion and ensuing war. The subsequent refugee crisis has also resulted in a reduction in the number of MAUs in the Ukraine.                

Rakuten itself reported a ¥1.4 billion (US$10.23 million) reduction in Q2-2022 profit for Viber reflecting the situation in Ukraine. However, this incorporates all Viber business activity – including advertising and sale of stickers, as well as traditional business messaging.

The total market size for Viber business messaging traffic volumes, and regional split of business messaging, is based on public statements from Viber. Traffic volumes are the result of multiple inputs across the main regions for Viber business messaging, showing actual business messages delivered up to 2021, and resultant growth trends throughout the forecast period.          

We have primarily attributed business messaging to the individual regional markets where Viber has at least, approximately, 20% penetration of the total smartphone user base. Mobilesquared has Viber business messaging active in 48 markets throughout the forecast period.

 

Facebook Messenger forecast methodology

In the CPaaS data Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of the Facebook Messenger traffic and spend is via a CPaaS provider. For the purposes of our CPaaS data, we have only used the billable API model, which is based on predominantly medium and large enterprises. Mobilesquared research understands that Meta will start charging for Facebook Messenger messages and sessions based on its WhatsApp Business model, from early 2023, and our forecasts, and associated forecasts included in CPaaS data, reflect this.

Based on this understanding, Mobilesquared has modelled the following:-

An average fee of US$300 per brand per month – payable to the Facebook Messenger Partner

The advertised Facebook Messenger template fee will be applicable from early 2023 – payable to Meta

An average rate of US$0.005 per message sent by enterprise – payable to the Facebook Messenger Partner.               

Facebook Messenger will charge brands for messages and conversations regardless of whether the conversation is initiated by the brand (A2P), or the consumer (P2A). Each key territory (as identified by Meta) has a “business-initiated rate” (A2P), and a “user-initiated rate” (P2A), which Mobilesquared has applied to each market as part of the modelling process.

Mobilesquared research estimates that Facebook Messenger was available as a commercial business messaging channel in 94 markets in 2020, this increased to 96 markets in 2022, and will continue to increase to 106 markets by 2026.

Total Facebook Messenger user numbers, and total Facebook Messenger user forecasts, are based on various public announcements dating back to December 2013 – most recently crossing 1.3 billion in September 2017, and 1.4 billion in December 2022.

Historical Facebook Messenger users were calculated for each year-end and benchmarked against total smartphone penetration to assess actual, and smartphone-penetration, growth trends. Facebook Messenger user and penetration numbers were then researched and collated for the individual countries and regions contained in our forecasts. Where country information was not available, estimates were benchmarked against regional Facebook Messenger smartphone penetration.  

Country and regional users were then aligned with the global total, and forecast throughout the period based on actual registered users, unique users, smartphone-penetration, and growth trends.

Mobilesquared applied enterprise survey data conducted during 2019-21, to ascertain the average size of the customer database for medium and large enterprises. We also applied consumer survey data conducted during 2019-22, to ascertain the average number of times a consumer would message a brand each year.

In addition, 1-2-1 interviews with Facebook Messenger partners, have provided Mobilesquared with traffic levels on a per country basis, dependent on where each company operates.

Taken together, the data formed the basis of calculations for all P2A and A2P messages and engagement.

We have assumed an average of five messages will be exchanged in both A2P and P2A conversations – 2.5 each from consumer and enterprise. We have assumed a response rate of 30% (starting in 2018) to A2P messages which, in turn, lead to conversational sessions. However, please note, only total traffic and total sessions have been included in the CPaaS data.

Mobilesquared has assumed that Facebook Messenger Partners will charge the same flat monthly admin fee (or not), that they do for WhatsApp Business. Similarly, we have applied the same assumption that some Facebook Messenger Partners include a P2A message volume within the fee, and that some do not. Some charge per user, some per message, and most seem to charge differing message rates – although their rates apply to both P2A conversations and A2P templates.

We have based our Facebook Messenger methodology on the guidelines and regulations determined by Meta, which can be accessed here https://developers.facebook.com/docs/messenger-platform

Apple Messages for Businesses forecast methodology

In the CPaaS data Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of the Apple Messages for Business (AMB) traffic and spend is via a CPaaS provider. AMB is an inbound customer care model, targeting large of medium-large enterprises with a platform that supports asynchronous messaging with live agents and basic automation support.          

AMB can only be accessed via an Apple partner (or Messaging Service Provider – MSP as Apple refers to them as). The MSPs charge a monthly licensing fee to use the platform based on a cost-per-user model, and a message fee of $0.005 once the business has exceeded their monthly allocation of 500 messages.

The data and assumptions contained in the AMB dataset (separate to CPaaS) were compiled from exhaustive research, interviews and surveys conducted from September 2021 to June 2022.  

The addressable market is based on monthly active iPhone users, modelled on public statements from Apple over the past five years. Mobilesquared has based the availability of AMB on where Apple has a dominant or strong smartphone market share and the availability of Apple Pay. To this end, Mobilesquared believes AMB was available in 26 markets in 2020, and has increased to 29 and is expected to stay at this number for the duration of the forecast period.

Mobilesquared has applied the total market size traffic volumes based on data shared by industry, and supplemented by online surveys, and where applicable, third-party data. Spend is based on the average prices applied by MSPs. Mobilesquared research reveals that Apple has received a very low take-up of the service, and this has been reflected in the very low traffic and spend forecasts for the channel by Mobilesquared.

 

OTT messaging apps forecast methodology

In the CPaaS data Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of the OTT messaging app traffic and spend is via a CPaaS provider. Given the limited reach in markets outside of their domestic dominance, Mobilesquared opted to create an OTT messaging catchall category to cover the likes of WeChat (China), LINE (Japan), and KakaoTalk (South Korea), and the smaller emerging channels (from a business messaging perspective) such as Telegram.

To generate traffic and spend for each messaging channel in each market, Mobilesquared applied company information and data, supplemented with publicly available information and data from third-parties, as well as data and insight from Mobilesquared’s research and online surveys.    

As pricing data for these channels was not widely available, Mobilesquared has applied a generic price point based on average price of rich messaging channels (RCS, WhatsApp and Viber), weighted against the average cost of an A2P SMS for the limited number of markets where business messaging is available over these channels. 

 

MMS forecast methodology

In the CPaaS data Mobilesquared has assumed that 100% of the MMS traffic and spend is via a CPaaS provider. Traffic (and service availability) is based on data shared during Mobilesquared’s 1-2-1 interviews and online surveys. Based on this information, Mobilesquared believes MMS is used as a business messaging proposition in 75 markets, although it is dominated by only a handful of markets.

Spend is based on available market pricing by MMS providers, and where not available, Mobilesquared has applied a weighted average.                                                                                                                             

 

Messageverse generic data

The starting point for MessageMap IQ data is our mobile operator subscriptions database. We research the top 200 markets worldwide on an annual basis, collating information from mobile operators and mobile operator groups, regulators, and where applicable GSMA Intelligence.    

Data-only contracts and M2M accounts have been excluded where available. Subscription forecasts are modelled based on previous growth records, overall mobile penetration rates and expected population growth. Population (global and national) numbers and national demographic data based on data from worldometer.com, population.un.org, worldpopulationreview.com, and populationpayramid.net.

Mobilesquared updates smartphone numbers and OS breakdowns on an annual basis to create a smartphone database, using device manufacturer data and quarterly updates, mobile operator data, national regulator data, and GSMA Intelligence data where applicable. In addition, when required, this data is also supplemented by publicly available third-party data. Smartphone forecasts are modelled based on previous growth records, overall smartphone penetration rates and expected growth rate as percentage of total unique mobile users and total population growth.

User numbers based on Mobilesquared data, and where applicable, Mobilesquared’s smartphone database. OTT user numbers based on company data, consumer research, and publicly available third-party data.

Engagement data based on existing Mobilesquared data, extensive consumer research (last updated 4Q 2021), and case studies shared by companies operating within the business messaging ecosystem privately to Mobilesquared, and publicly available case studies also. Additional third-party consumer research data applied where it provides supplementary and incremental consumer behaviour knowledge.

Consumer research conducted by Luc.id on behalf of Mobilesquared. UK-based Luc.id conducted multiple consumer research campaigns for Mobilesquared between 2018 and 2021, using its online panel of double opt-in consumer participants. Data in Messageverse is based on consumer research of >20,000 respondents based across the Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia Pacific. Where Mobilesquared has actual market consumer data, this has been applied to Messageverse. Where actual consumer data is not available for a particular country, Mobilesquared has applied the regional average from the consumer data.

 

Engagement Methodology

In 1H2022, Mobilesquared undertook a series of consumer engagement surveys covering 10,000 individuals across 10 markets – Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, France, Germany, UK, Malaysia, Singapore and the USA.               

Results from Brazil, Colombia & Mexico were averaged to provide indications for other Latin American markets while, similarly, France, Germany & UK were averaged to provide indications for other European markets. New Zealand was aligned with results from Australia and, similarly, Canada was aligned with results from the USA.    

In total, we have extrapolated results for a further 65 markets giving total engagement coverage of 75 markets. Later this year, we will repeat the process to include coverage of markets in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and North Africa and elsewhere in Asia.   

Specifically, we wanted to know the following:

• Which communications channels do you use on your mobile phone?
• How do brands and businesses mainly contact you?
• How often are you contacted by brands and businesses on the channels selected previously?
• Of the brands that you have opted-in to receive communications from, which sectors do these operate in?
• Do you find the messages from brands and businesses on the channels selected previously useful?
• What is an acceptable number of messages that you would like to receive on a weekly basis from the brands/ channels that you have opted-in to?
• What is the preferred time of delivery for messages from the brands/ channels that you have opted-in to?
• How many messages from brands will you read?
• How many messages from brands will you click on to find out more?
• How likely are you to make a purchase based on a message you receive from a brand, assuming that the offer is targeted and relevant to you?
• What would be your preferred payment option when making a payment in a messaging channel?

The survey answers enabled us to model engagement behaviour based on gender, age and channel and were applied to our unique user research covering individual messaging channels.

Where applicable we have used older consumer data from 2019 and 2018 to provide more granular information. This was based on research of 2,000 and 3,000 users respectively, on engagement issues based on the usefulness of different message types, and the timing of when to most effectively send a message.

All of the above will be updated in our 2022 consumer research of 40+ markets.