india mobile 2009 mcmu toc

8/4/2019 India Mobile 2009 MCMU TOC

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/india-mobile-2009-mcmu-toc 1/14

India Mobile 2009

7

Table of content

INTRODUCTION............................................................ 1 METHODOLOGY ........................................................... 3 Overview........................................................................... 3 The Scope and Sampling - Land Survey ....................................... 4 Sample Achievement............................................................. 4 The Scope and Sampling – Consumer Panel Profile ......................... 6 The Scope and Sampling – Combining the Two Sample Sets............... 6 The Scope and Sampling – In-Depth Mobile Usage Behavior and Brand

Preferences........................................................................ 9 Questionnaire Designing and Reporting......................................10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................... 12 KEY FINDINGS ............................................................ 16 The MCMU Market Overview ...................................................16 The MCMU Demographics and Socio-Economic Status .....................19 Mobile Handset Usage...........................................................22 Mobile Handset Brand Preferences ...........................................26 Mobile Service Usage............................................................28 Mobile Service Brand Preferences ............................................33 Landline Phone Ownerships and Usage.......................................36 INDEX: CHARTS..........................................................108 INDEX: TABLES ..........................................................110



India Mobile 2009

3

Methodology

Overview

For estimating the size, demographic and socio-economic profiling of allurban mobile users in India, 76,502 sample responses were collectedfrom a baseline ‘land survey’ which was conducted by Juxt in Dec 2008–Jan 2009. In the urban areas, the survey covered 16,317 urbanhouseholds encompassing all socio-economic classes in 40 citiescovering town classes of all population sizes spread across all the fourregions of the country.

A structured questionnaire was used for this purpose. The focus of the

baseline survey was on classifying the sampled household on theirhousehold characteristics - capturing the basic demographic profile ofeach member in the household, including whether they used a mobilephone or not, assess the socio-economic status of the household andcapture their physical and financial assets ownership and liabilities. Forthe respondent members who used a mobile phone, their phone numberand connection technology type was also captured.

Another 76,638 sample were taken from Juxt’s own consumer panel(www.getcounted.net). The samples were accumulated betweenDecember 2008 and July 2009.

Here again an almost similar structured questionnaire was used for thepurpose (differing only in the phrasing of questions to make it moresuitable for a ‘self-administered’ format). Exactly the same basic leveldemographic information of each member of the household wascaptured, including mobile phone usage status, in an online profiling ofthese consumers as was done in the land survey. The same otherhousehold details to assess the socio-economic status of the householdas captured in the land survey were also captured here.

The responses collected from the two methods (offline survey andonline consumer panel profiling) were then combined into a commonsample database of 153,140. The data was then cleaned, processed andtabulated to derive the size of urban mobile phone users and their

demographic and socio-economic profile.

Before analyzing the data, it was made ‘representative’ for all urbanIndians by applying 6 distinct demographic representation ‘weights’ -urban district type, region, SEC, gender, age and preferred language ofreading. The representation weights were derived from the highlyauthentic Govt. Of India population data (NSSO/Census/RGI).

Further, three additional ‘mobile usage’ related representation weights- telecom circle, mobile service provider used and mobile phoneconnection technology used (GSM or CDMA) - were also applied to bringin the ‘usage representation’ of all the urban mobile users at the circle

and service provider level. These representation weights were again

http://www.getcounted.net/




Multiple Connection Mobile Users

4

derived from the highly authentic telecom industry association andregulatory authority data (TRAI/COAI/AUSPI).

Lastly, the in-depth mobile usage behavior, including the no. of mobileconnections per person, no. of mobile users per household, the serviceand handset usage details and brand preferences was done through anonline survey conducted by Juxt within its consumer panel. This onlinesurvey was conducted between June – July 2009 among 12,500 panelmembers from various socio-economic backgrounds and coming fromvarious types of town classes. Again, a ‘self-administrable’ andstructured questionnaire was used for this purpose.

The Scope and Sampling - Land Survey

The ‘household’ level sample base in the land survey for urban areaswas 16,317, with coverage of 40 individual cities of various populationsizes. The per city sample sizes for the top most populous cities (30lakh+ population cities) was kept at 800, for the next level of populous

towns (between 5 lakhs-30 lakhs) it was kept at 400, and for the thirdgroup of least populous towns (below 5 lakhs) it was kept at 300 1. Therelatively higher sample base for the larger population towns werechosen essentially to do a more extensive and deeper sampling withinthese towns.

The distribution of these 40 cities was done ensuring a good spreadacross the 4 regions of the country and covering all ‘urban town classes’as defined in the ‘Census’ (right down to 5,000-20,000 population sizetowns, the smallest town class in India as defined by the Census). Thelist of the 40 selected towns and their regional and town classdistribution, along with reporting sample sizes, is displayed in Table 1.

Further, to adequately capture households and family profiles of alltypes of socio-economic classes (SEC) in urban India, including theirmobile usage levels, we allocated equal sample quota among the 5broad urban socio-economic classes A, B, C, D and E across variouszones within a town, and then across the town classes and regions. Tocorrect for and put back the real representation of the socio-economicclasses (and not equal representation), during the data processing stagewe incorporated the appropriate SEC ‘weights’ derived from the actualurban population statistics from authentic govt. Sources (NationalSample Survey Organization and Census of India)2.

Within a city, geographical locations from each of the 4 zones (north,south, east and west) were chosen. From each zone and location withina city an equal number of households from the five socio-economicclasses A, B, C, D, and E were surveyed.

Sample Achievement

The 40 cities where the land survey for urban areas was conducted andthe size of the sample data collected/achieved from each of thesecities is as follows:

1 See Table 1 for detailed city-wise sample break ups of the land survey 2 * NSSO/Census data projected for year 2009 by Indicus Analytics



India Mobile 2009

5

Table 1: Detailed City-Wise Sample Base Distribution of the Land Survey(Achieved) – Household Level

Region CityUrban District

Class (bypopulation size)

Urban Sample Size(Households)

Urban DistrictClass

Delhi 10 lakh + 798 10 lakh+ (12)

Kanpur (UP) 10 lakh + 398 10 lakh+ (12)

Ludhiana (Pun) 10 lakh + 399 10 lakh+ (12)

Allahabad (UP) 5 lakh – 10 lakh 400 10 lakh+ (12)

Ajmer (Raj) 1 lakh – 5 lakh 299 10 lakh+ (12)

Bhadohi (UP) 50 K – 1 lakh 299 10 lakh+ (12)

Muradnagar 50 K – 1 lakh 300 10 lakh+ (12)

Sohna (Har) 20 K – 50 K 302 10 lakh+ (12)

Phillaur (Pun) 20 K – 50 K 310 5 lakh-10 lakh

North

Kishangarh 5 K – 20 K 299 5 lakh-10 lakh

Mumbai (Mah) 10 lakh + 800 5 lakh-10 lakh

Ahmedabad 10 lakh + 802 5 lakh-10 lakh

Pune (Mah) 10 lakh + 400 5 lakh-10 lakh

Rajkot (Guj) 5 lakh – 10 lakh 402 5 lakh-10 lakh

Dewas (MP) 1 lakh – 5 lakh 239 5 lakh-10 lakh

Hinganghat 50 K – 1 lakh 302 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

Mhowgaon (MP) 20 K – 50 K 299 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

Katol (Mah) 20 K – 50 K 225 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

Ghogha (Guj) 5 K – 20 K 299 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

West

Bhaurasa (MP) 5 K – 20 K 307 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

Kolkata (WB) 10 lakh + 799 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

Patna (Bih) 10 lakh + 400 1 lakh-5 lakh (5)

Guwahati (Ass) 5 lakh – 10 lakh 399 50 K-1 lakh (6)

Bhubneshwar 5 lakh – 10 lakh 400 50 K-1 lakh (6)

Raniganj (WB) 1 lakh – 5 lakh 300 50 K-1 lakh (6)

Bhatapara 50 K – 1 lakh 299 50 K-1 lakh (6)

Dimapur (Nag) 50 K – 1 lakh 300 50 K-1 lakh (6)

Champa (Chat) 20 K – 50 K 300 50 K-1 lakh (6)

Baliari (Jha) 5 K – 20 K 300 50 K-1 lakh (6)

East

Khusrupur (Bih) 5 K – 20 K 300 20 K–50 K (6)

Chennai (TN) 10 lakh + 787 20 K–50 K (6)Bangalore (Kar) 10 lakh + 814 20 K–50 K (6)

Hyderabad (AP) 10 lakh + 779 20 K–50 K (6)

Vizag (AP) 10 lakh + 409 20 K–50 K (6)

Mysore (Kar) 5 lakh – 10 lakh 391 20 K–50 K (6)

Kozhikode (Ker) 1 lakh – 5 lakh 374 20 K–50 K (6)

Nellore (AP) 1 lakh – 5 lakh 286 5 K– 20 K (6)

Cheruvannur 50 K – 1 lakh 208 5 K– 20 K (6)

Edapaddi (TN) 20 K – 50 K 298 5 K– 20 K (6)

South

Pallavakam (TN) 5 K – 20 K 295 5 K– 20 K (6)

Total Households 16,317 Total (40)

Individuals 76,502 -




6

The Scope and Sampling – Consumer Panel Profile

76,638 samples from the total study sample of 153,140 for sizing andprofiling the urban mobile users on their demographic and socio-economic parameters were taken from Juxt’s own consumer panel(www.getcounted.net) as accumulated between December 2008 andJuly 2009. Here profile data of only those panel members who havebeen active in the panel in last 6 months and had either uploaded orupdated their profile in or after December 2008 were included.

The Juxt Consumer Panel members, though enlisted online, are profiledon demographic and household parameters applicable for any‘consumer’ per se. Though capturing these consumers online does bringin ‘selective sampling’ bias (as consumers of certain demographicprofile, or combination of profiles, are more likely to use internet inIndia, and therefore, more likely to be members of such a panel).

However, despite these biases we could use the panel data in the studyas in any case we were to finally apply appropriate ‘representationweights’ as derived from the authentic govt. Population statistics andtelecom industry associations to make the final results representativeof the entire mobile using urban population in India (and not just ofthose sampled, whether through land survey, or through online panelenlistment/profiling).

In principle, this approach is almost akin to our methodology of makingour ‘land survey’ also eventually representative of the urban mobileuser population. The only difference is that while using our land surveysampled data we removed the ‘equal quota sampling’ bias by applying

population and usage representative weights, in the online panelprofiling sampled data we removed the ‘selective sampling’ bias byapplying the population and usage representative weights. The netresult is the same. In either case, by applying the population and usagerepresentation weights we corrected and neutralized the ‘incumbentsampling biases’ that came in as a result of the ‘medium’ used for theresearch.

Since we have used the same demographic, household profiling andmobile usage status parameters in our panel enrolment as in our annualbaseline land survey, it was possible and easy for us to map andintegrate the two data sets.

The Scope and Sampling – Combining the Two Sample Sets

After adding the samples of both the mediums, we not only had a muchlarger sample size per se (153,140 individuals), but also had a morerobust and richer depth of sampling than what would have beenpossible using only a single medium of research:

Coverage of as many as 3,175 towns in India - making it probablyone of the ‘widest coverage’ sample studies on urban mobile usersin India

Reporting sample size of more than 500 from 46 distinct towns Reporting sample size of more than 200 from 87 distinct towns





India Mobile 2009

7

Reporting sample size of more than 100 from 154 distinct towns

Reporting sample size of more than 50 from 270 distinct towns

Table 2: Detailed City-Wise Sample Base Distribution of Urban MobileUsers at the Combined Offline and Online Sampling (Achieved) – (87

Cities with More Than 200 Reporting Sample Listed Here)

City Population Size Circle Sample

Delhi 50L+ Metros 11,450

Mumbai 50L+ Metros 9,413

Bangalore 30L to 50L A' Circle 8,935

Chennai 30L to 50L Metros 7,559

Hyderabad 30L to 50L A' Circle 5,155

Kolkata 30L to 50L Metros 3,535

Pune 10L to 30L A' Circle 3,013

Secunderabad 1L to 5L A' Circle 2,677

Ahmedabad 30L to 50L A' Circle 2,523

Bhubaneswar 5L to 10L C' Circle 1,962

Guwahati 5L to 10L C' Circle 1,675

Lucknow 10L to 30L B' Circle 1,379

Dimapur 1L to 5L C' Circle 1,303

Surat 10L to 30L A' Circle 1,108

Gurgaon 1L to 5L B' Circle 1,074

Mhowgaon 20K to 50K B' Circle 1,071

Jaipur 10L to 30L B' Circle 1,056

Ghaziabad 5L to 10L B' Circle 1,041

Visakhapatnam 5L to 10L A' Circle 1,013

Chandigarh 5L to 10L B' Circle 945

Vadodara 10L to 30L A' Circle 940

Coimbatore 5L to 10L A' Circle 934

Indore 10L to 30L B' Circle 902

Bhatapara 50K to 1L C' Circle 874

Thane 10L to 30L A' Circle 870

Faridabad 10L to 30L B' Circle 848

Bhaurasa 1L to 5L B' Circle 831

Dewas 1L to 5L B' Circle 803

Noida 1L to 5L B' Circle 768

Bhopal 10L to 30L B' Circle 746

Vijayawada 5L to 10L A' Circle 737

Anekal 20K to 50K A' Circle 722

Nagpur 10L to 30L A' Circle 710

Kanpur 10L to 30L B' Circle 710

Champa 20K to 50K C' Circle 695

Trivandrum 5L to 10L B' Circle 676

Mysore 5L to 10L A' Circle 645

Ludhiana 10L to 30L B' Circle 640

Patna 10L to 30L C' Circle 631

Kochi 5L to 10L B' Circle 620

Kalyan-Dombivali 10L to 30L A' Circle 582




8

Rajkot 5L to 10L A' Circle 544

Madurai 5L to 10L A' Circle 522

Pallavaram 1L to 5L A' Circle 513

Edappadi 20K to 50K A' Circle 509

Pimpri Chinchwad 10L to 30L A' Circle 504

Nashik 10L to 30L A' Circle 456

Tiruchirappalli 5L to 10L A' Circle 402

Guntur 5L to 10L A' Circle 400

Mira-Bhayandar 5L to 10L A' Circle 388

Warangal 5L to 10L A' Circle 363

Agra 10L to 30L B' Circle 347

Mangalore 1L to 5L A' Circle 344

Meerut 10L to 30L B' Circle 340

Allahabad 5L to 10L B' Circle 336

Ranchi 5L to 10L C' Circle 327

Salem 5L to 10L A' Circle 318

Raipur 5L to 10L B' Circle 317

Tirupati 1L to 5L A' Circle 315

Pondicherry 1L to 5L C' Circle 313

Hubli-Dharwad 1L to 5L A' Circle 301

Jalandhar 5L to 10L B' Circle 300

Jodhpur 5L to 10L B' Circle 300

Cuttack 5L to 10L C' Circle 293

Jamshedpur 5L to 10L C' Circle 293

Amritsar 5L to 10L B' Circle 291

Dehradun 1L to 5L B' Circle 284

Gwalior 5L to 10L B' Circle 283

Jabalpur 5L to 10L B' Circle 275

Ambarnath 1L to 5L A' Circle 273

Aurangabad 5L to 10L B' Circle 271

Kozhikode 1L to 5L B' Circle 266

Srinagar 5L to 10L C' Circle 265

Varanasi 10L to 30L B' Circle 261

Tiruppur 1L to 5L A' Circle 260

Alandi 1L to 5L A' Circle 257

Nellore 1L to 5L A' Circle 253

Erode 1L to 5L A' Circle 245

Jammu 1L to 5L C' Circle 245

Raurkela 1L to 5L C' Circle 227

Bilaspur 1L to 5L C' Circle 226

Belgaum 1L to 5L A' Circle 224

Alwal 1L to 5L A' Circle 210

Patiala 1L to 5L B' Circle 209

Udaipur 1L to 5L B' Circle 207

Vasai 20K to 50K A' Circle 201

Kurnool 1L to 5L A' Circle 201



India Mobile 2009

9

The Scope and Sampling – In-Depth Mobile Usage Behavior andBrand Preferences

The information on usage behavior on both mobile service and handset,along with the brand preferences for them, was done through an online

survey conducted by Juxt within its consumer panel. This online surveywas conducted between June 2009–July 2009 among 12,500 mobileusing active panel members from various socio-economic backgroundsand coming from various types of town classes. The objective of theonline survey was to collect ‘in-depth’ information on ‘service usage’ aswell as ‘handset usage’ among these mobile users. 10,833 finally usableresponses from this survey were finally reported.

The key ‘service usage’ information captured were – no. of phoneconnections per person, total no. of phone users in the household,mobile service provider names, type of connection technology

(GSM/CDMA), connection plan (prepaid/postpaid), features subscribedwith the service provider, typical usage durations on weekdays andweekends, usage satisfaction/dissatisfaction, short code awareness &usage, willingness & preference for receiving ads on mobile and so on.Brand preference related questions included capturing top of the mindbrand recall of service providers, multiple brand usage (for multipleconnections), most used service provider, consideration set and mostpreferred service brand for next connection, likely reasons ofswitching/change connection, etc.

The key ‘handset usage’ information captured were – no. of mobilehandset owned and used, brand and model used, tenure of usage,

approximate price of currently used handset, features used on thehandset, accessories used, usage satisfaction/dissatisfaction, preferredset of features considered before buying a new handset and so on.Brand preference related questions included capturing top of the mindbrand recalls for handset, multiple handset brand usage, most usedhandset brand, consideration set and most preferred handset brand fornext purchase, likely reasons of switching/changing handset, etc.

Here again, the data collected online did not necessarily had to berepresentative of all types of urban mobile users in itself - as theindividual level demographic and usage ‘multipliers’ from thepopulation and industry statistics were to be applied to make the data

representative of the entire mobile using urban population in Indiaanyways.

However, to be methodologically correct, while doing such an onlinesampling we needed to ensure (and we did to the extent possible) thatenough samples were collected from the ‘online panel’ covering all the6 relevant ‘demographic combinations’ and the 3 relevant ‘usageparameter combinations’ on which the ‘multipliers’ derived from thepopulation and industry data were to be applied.

Eventually, in the online survey highly adequate samples were achieved(10,833 reporting sample overall) on all the demographic parameters as

well as usage parameters for most telecom circles and service operatorsfor a high level statistical validity and robustness of the findings.




10

Questionnaire Designing and Reporting

While the land survey questionnaires were administered in English orthe vernacular language in which the respondent was more comfortablein understanding and responding, the online profiling forms andquestionnaires were only in English.

The questionnaires were structured and designed to reduce the level of‘respondent fatigue’ to an extent that was practically possible.Accordingly, before administering them on the field, the questionnaireswere ‘pre-tested’ and ‘timed’ to take approximately 15-20 minutes fora respondent to complete depending on the speed of comprehensionand answering of the questions. Wherever relevant, it was also possiblefor a respondent to answer/choose the options ‘none’ or ‘any other’.

In the land survey, to test the accuracy and authenticity of theresponses during and after the field work, 30% ‘back checks’ wereconducted by the field agency and 10% ‘separate’ back checks weredone by Juxt staff.

On the online panel, GetCounted panel members are enlisted andactivated only through a ‘double opt-in’ process, where they can loginto the panel post registration only using a ‘genuine’ email id (only afterthey click on the link sent to them by email on their registered emailid). The ‘double opt-in’ registration process is one of the most widelyused and accepted methods worldwide by research companies thatoffer consume panels online to ensure authenticity of the enlistedpanel members. In addition to the double opt-in, Juxt panelmanagement staff also conducts continuous and on-going ‘random’telephonic back checks among its newly enrolled panel members on amonthly basis.

Eventually, all the usable responses thus collected from the sample setsof both the survey mediums (offline and online) were taken up for datacleaning, after which they were collated, crosschecked and processedfor tabulation and analysis.

Finally, the appropriate demographic and mobile usage weights or‘multipliers’ were incorporated into the usable survey responses. This

ensured that the survey findings were now ‘representative’ of theentire mobile using urban Indian population and not just of those whoparticipated in the two surveys/profiling exercises.

The net result was the compilation of the latest, highly authentic andrepresentative findings on the sizing, profiling and mobile usagebehavior of both all urban mobile users (AUMU) as well as the multipleconnection mobile users (MCMU). While the demographic and socio-economic profile findings of the study are representative of all the 155million urban mobile users as of May 2009, the mobile usage behaviorfindings of the study are representative of 130 million urban mobileusers (approx. 85% of all urban mobile users).

This database was then used for making ‘insightful’ analysis andconclusions as presented in this report about the multiple connection



India Mobile 2009

11

mobile users in urban India, both in their profile and mobile service andhandset usage as well as in the similarities and distinctions they showvis-à-vis the single connection mobile users.




108

Index: ChartsChart 1: Number of Mobile Connections Owned Individually..... 17 Chart 2: Region-Wise Break-Ups.......................................... 18 Chart 3: Age Group Distribution .......................................... 19 Chart 4: Gender Breakup ................................................... 20 Chart 5: Monthly Household Income..................................... 21 Chart 6: Most Expensive Vehicle Owned by the Household ....... 21 Chart 7: Place of Purchase of Mobile Phone Handset .............. 23 Chart 8: Most Used Mobile Handset Brand (Cumulative)........... 27 Chart 9: Most Used Mobile Handset Brand (Preferred Basis) ..... 27 Chart 10: Usage Period of Most Used Mobile Phone Connection. 29 Chart 11: Average Talk Time in a Day Using Your Most Used

Mobile Phone Connection .................................................. 30 Chart 12: Most Used Service Provider of Your Mobile Phone(Cumulative) ................................................................... 34 Chart 13: Most Used Service Provider of Your Mobile Phone(Preferred) ..................................................................... 35 Chart 14: Number of Landline Connections in HH ................... 36 Chart 15: Number of Mobile Connections Owned Individually ... 39 Chart 16: Number of Mobile Connections in HH ...................... 40 Chart 17: Region-Wise Break-Ups ........................................ 41 Chart 18: Type of Connection Technology............................. 44 Chart 19: Age Group Distribution ........................................ 45 Chart 20: Gender Breakup ................................................. 46 Chart 21: Highest Educational Qualification .......................... 49 Chart 22: Head of the Household ........................................ 51 Chart 23: Monthly Household Income ................................... 52 Chart 24: Most Expensive Vehicle Owned by the Household ..... 53 Chart 25: Ownership of Credit Cards (Individually) ................. 54 Chart 26: Period of Usage of Most Used Mobile Phone Handset . 55 Chart 27: Mode of Acquisition of Mobile Phone Handset .......... 56 Chart 28: Mode of Purchase/Payment of Mobile Phone Handset 58 Chart 29: Place of Purchase of Mobile Phone Handset............. 60 Chart 30: Mobile Phone Handset Accessories Used.................. 62 Chart 31: Overall Satisfaction with Mobile Phone Handset ....... 65 Chart 32: Likeliness to Continue with Existing Mobile PhoneHandset.......................................................................... 66 Chart 33: Most Used Mobile Handset Brand (Cumulative) ......... 71 Chart 34: Most Used Mobile Handset Brand (Preferred Basis) .... 72 Chart 35: Type of Mobile Connection Plan ............................ 75 Chart 36: Usage Period of Most Used Mobile Phone Connection. 76 Chart 37: Status of DND (Do Not Disturb) Registration on YourMost Used Mobile Phone Connection .................................... 77



India Mobile 2009

109

Chart 38: Reason for Non-Registration with DND .................... 78 Chart 39: Frequency of Incoming SMS Ads/Calls Etc PostRegistration with DND ....................................................... 79 Chart 40: Average Talk Time in a Day Using Your Most UsedMobile Phone Connection .................................................. 81 Chart 41: Place of Purchase of Mobile Phone Connection......... 84 Chart 42: Degree of Openness/Receptiveness to MobileAdvertisements................................................................ 87 Chart 43: Have You Ever Sent Short Codes from Your MobilePhone ............................................................................ 89 Chart 44: Overall Satisfaction with Mobile Phone Connection ... 91 Chart 45: Likeliness to Recommendation of Your Mobile PhoneConnection ..................................................................... 92 Chart 46: Likeliness to Continue with Existing Mobile PhoneConnection ..................................................................... 93 Chart 47: Most Used Service Provider of Your Mobile Phone(Cumulative) ................................................................... 98 Chart 48: Most Used Service Provider of Your Mobile Phone(Preferred) ..................................................................... 99 Chart 49: Number of Landline Connections in HH .................. 102 Chart 50: Most Used Service Provider of Landline.................. 103 Chart 51: Internet Connectivity Speed on Landline Phone....... 105




110

Index: TablesTable 1: Detailed City-Wise Sample Base Distribution of the LandSurvey (Achieved) – Household Level.................................. 5 Table 2: Detailed City-Wise Sample Base Distribution of UrbanMobile Users at the Combined Offline and Online Sampling(Achieved) – (87 Cities with More Than 200 Reporting SampleListed Here) ............................................................... 7 Table 3: Cities ...........................................................18 Table 4: Mobile Circle ..................................................19 Table 5: Socio Economic Classification ..............................20 Table 6: Approximate Price of Mobile Phone Handset ............22 Table 7: Features in Your Mobile Phone Handset ..................24 Table 8: Satisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Handset.......25 Table 9: Dissatisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Handset....25 Table 10: Top of Mind Mobile Handset Brand.......................26 Table 11: Consideration Set of Mobile Phone Handset Brands forFuture Purchase .........................................................28 Table 12: Most Likely Future Purchase of Mobile Phone Handset28 Table 13: Features Activated in Most Used Mobile PhoneConnection ...............................................................29 Table 14: Average Monthly Expenditure of Mobile PhoneConnection ...............................................................31 Table 15: Satisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Connection..31 Table 16: Reasons for Changing the Mobile Service Provider ....32 Table 17: Top of Mind Service Provider..............................34 Table 18: Service Providers Considered for Future Purchase ....35 Table 19: Most Likely Mobile Phone Connection to Be Used inFuture .....................................................................36 Table 20: Features of Most Used Landline Phone ..................37 Table 21: Cities ..........................................................42 Table 22: Mobile Circle .................................................43 Table 23: Preferred Language of Reading ...........................47 Table 24: Socio Economic Classification .............................48 Table 25: Occupation ...................................................50 Table 26: Person Who Gifted Mobile Phone Handset ..............57 Table 27: Approximate Price of Mobile Phone Handset ...........59 Table 28: Features in Your Mobile Phone Handset.................61 Table 29: Satisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Handset .....63

Table 30: Dissatisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Handset ..64 Table 31: Reasons for Changing the Existing Mobile PhoneHandset ...................................................................67 Table 32: Most Important Feature of mobile phone handsetconsidered prior to purchase ..........................................68 Table 33: Features to Be Considered Prior to Purchase of MobileHandset (Cumulative)...................................................69 Table 34: Top of Mind Mobile Handset Brand.......................70 Table 35: Consideration Set of Mobile Phone Handset Brands forFuture Purchase .........................................................73 Table 36: Most Likely Future Purchase of Mobile Phone Handset74 Table 37: Features Activated in Most Used Mobile PhoneConnection ...............................................................80



India Mobile 2009

111

Table 38: Average Monthly Expenditure of Mobile PhoneConnection ...............................................................82 Table 39: Preferred Mode of Payment ...............................83 Table 40: Satisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Connection..85 Table 41: Dissatisfying Aspects of Your Mobile Phone Connection.............................................................................86 Table 42: Types of Ads Received on Mobile Phone.................88 Table 43: Reasons of Sending Short Codes from Your MobilePhone......................................................................90 Table 44: Reasons for Changing the Mobile Service Provider ....94 Table 45: Features of Mobile Phone Connection to Be Considered(Cumulative) .............................................................95 Table 46: Most Important Feature of Mobile Phone ConnectionConsidered Prior to Purchase ..........................................96 Table 47: Top of Mind Service Provider..............................97 Table 48: Service Providers Considered for Future Purchase .. 100 Table 49: Most Likely Mobile Phone Connection to Be Used in

Future ................................................................... 101 Table 50: Features of Most Used Landline Phone ................ 104 Table 51: Average Monthly Landline Bill........................... 106

india mobile 2009 mcmu toc

Documents