Free Newsletter
Most app stores are going to fail – page 2
Instead of the carriers launching an all-out counter-attack they worsened the situation in two big ways. First, they cut down the size of their own staff to recognize the reduced revenue of mobile content. Second, and this is much worse, they started shifting operational costs onto the publishers and re-negotiated their rev shares downward. They also applied pressure to publishers in other ways that ultimately added costs and squeezed margins.
It's gotten bad enough that we are now watching publishers walk away from previous title acceptances. (In other words, publishers have accepted games/apps by the carriers but then choose not to build and deploy because they've lost confidence in harvesting a financial return for their efforts.)
If the carriers want to save the mobile content business, they need to attack both the cost and the revenue side of the ROI equation. Here's how:
1. Dump the multi-handset rule: For years, carriers have required that publishers support a minimum number of handsets to launch a title. That's 20, 30 or even 40 handsets, even though only a handful of them produce 80 percent of the downloads. It's way too risky to spend the money to port to that many devices without a market test. Often, the game/app doesn't work well on the older phones, so a disproportionately high amount of money goes into supporting them.
2. Abolish certification costs: Two of the big four domestic carriers have exclusive agreements with testing houses that charge for product certification (quality assurance). What a rip-off. Carrier 3 is essentially doing the same now but not formally, and rumor has it that Carrier 4 is considering the same. This adds thousands of dollars to the launch of any title on the carrier deck. I understand that QA is important, but why not bring testing in-house to reduce costs or at least provide a multi-vendor strategy to promote price competition?
3. Market the deck: The number of people who purchase mobile content is stunningly low on a percentage basis (9 percent or less). The carriers cannot give up on raising that number. All customers should get their first game, ringtone and wallpaper for free as an incentive to learn how the mobile content storefront works--risk free. Instead, the carriers have handset OEMs pre-load games and free content onto the phone. That's a great way to make games like Snake and BrickBreaker super-successful, but doesn't do much in the way of producing first-time buyers. And now that the majority of users are skipping the carrier storefront button altogether in favor of the Internet browsing button as I explained earlier, the carriers need to begin advertising their storefront on the mobile Internet to bring them back. The cows are out of the barn!
4. Keep subscriptions: There's a move underway amongst some of the carriers to abolish subscriptions, as if somehow they produce a negative customer experience. Wrong. It's not that subscriptions are inherently bad, it's that subscriptions have been promoted as a creative financing technique instead of a pricing strategy for content that has recurring value. In other words, take a platformer game that should sell for $7.99 and offer it for $2.99 per month just because $2.99 sounds cheaper than $7.99. Go back to enforcing subscriptions instead of eliminating them altogether and take a hard look at my next related point.
5. Monitor the deck: The sheer amount of content that is live on the carrier decks today that simply DOES NOT RUN would astound you. Ringtones sound awful, wallpapers don't fit, videos don't play, games don't load and apps crash. You think I'm making this up? Every day, thousands and thousands of returns, because of garbage that either got through the system or, and this is more interesting, games/apps that were somehow changed AFTER they were certified. Servers go down, certificates expire, IP addresses un-whitelisted. The users don't know who to call and don't care enough to chase it so they simply cancel their subscription or get a refund. Incidentally, I don't think anyone is monitoring Apple's deck either, so every time one of those 50,000 apps update themselves, they're no longer what Apple approved a month ago. Who knows what you're gonna get?
6. Fix the damn store: There's no excuse for how awful the carrier mobile storefronts look. I don't think they look any better than when they launched on the black and white phones years ago. The user interface is so first-generation and the number of clicks and wait time to do anything is ridiculous. For the BREW carriers, it's better, but it's not really "awesome" either. Compare any carrier's BlackBerry storefront against the BlackBerry App World storefront, and you can't help but be shocked at the difference. And that's RIM's first try!
Why the OEM app stores are going to fail
Back to the three fundamental requirements: discoverability, billing and ROI. I'm not going to weigh in on each individual initiative here, but here's what's going to go wrong in the collective:
1. Billing. If you think that telephone companies are clueless when it comes to content, what makes you think that handset OEMs would be any better? But that's not the worst of it, handset OEMs are B2B companies. They don't have consumer relationships past their warranty cards and support websites and most importantly, they don't have end-user billing relationships. So these app stores need to use indirect billing methods (credit card, PayPal, etc.) I think adoption will be slow.
2. Discovery. How will the end-users find out about the app store? Well, simple, right? The app store will be a link on the phone's menu. But wait a minute--I just got done explaining how the carriers were losing their discoverability because users are bypassing the store button and going straight to the web. Why wouldn't the users bypass the OEM storefront button too? Further, we're not talking about an installed base of millions of users here, we're talking about connecting storefront buttons to brand new phone releases. And incidentally, the carriers need to be on-board with those since THEY are the ones who buy the phones for resale. Ask Nokia about that. Unless the handset OEMs are going to start selling phones from their own retail stores, they need to rely on the carrier sales force to educate customers. Good luck with that.
3. ROI. Connected directly to the two points above, the ROI for publishers is a little shaky. Storefronts basically soft-launch with a zero user base, an uncertain billing system (that probably doesn't support subscriptions), a new developer portal that just might not be perfected yet and a new SDK needed to exploit all the cool features of the device. Oh, and by the way, 90 percent of the product downloads in the store will be free so that the users get a chance to, you know, have some risk-free fun. I think publishers will adopt a wait-and-see attitude.
Finally, for all of you that are convinced I'm an idiot because I've forgotten about iPhone's success, let me say that the reason Apple is succeeding is because they solved all three problems.
1. Billing. Credit card, yes, but look at how it's done. First of all, the concept of attaching a credit card is already embedded into the iTunes culture. Second, it's literally part of the product registration process. Third, Apple licensed the one-click patent from Amazon (you can see it right there in the registration terms and conditions). It was flawless execution.
2. Discovery. Steve Jobs, done.
3. ROI. Millions of units supported by a single SDK, a single handset purchase for development, no certification costs, no porting costs, global market access. Deployment costs are ridiculously low compared to carrier launches.
Now, I did point out in my last article that Apple is a facing a publisher ROI problem due to the unsustainability of the apps-to-customers ratio, the proliferation of free content, and the sheer number of market players. But even with all that, you can launch 10 iPhone apps for the cost of one carrier-distributed app, so most publishers are going to keep on trying for a hit. In other words, at least for the moment, they still "believe."
The bottom line? I predict that Apple's success is unique to Apple, and not a blueprint for other handset OEMs to copy. I predict that most handset OEM storefronts will fail due primarily to their inability to solve the billing problem. I predict that the carriers will follow only a portion of my advice and eventually realign their place in the content ecosystem as the dominant billing intermediary.
Finally, I predict that the mobile content publishers who survive will take matters into their own hands, and begin to create their own direct customer relationships. They will market and advertise their way out of this uncertainty, which will be the focus of my next article.
Konny Zsigo is a 20-year veteran of the wireless data industry. His company, the WirelessDeveloper Agency, creates and executes mobile Web marketing campaigns to directly increase content sales and drive users to action. WDA also supports mobile publishers with North American distribution, licensing and production of mobile content (video, games, apps, ringtones, wallpapers, themes and more).
Comments
Firstly, it is good to see some sense amongst all the app store excitement. Many people still believe that getting their app into a store will automatically result in sales with the store doing all the marketing they need as part of that 30% revenue share.
One key element you touch on with billing is the sales conversion rate - how easy it is for customers to successfully buy the item. As you say, Apple forces a customer to enter their credit card details as part of signup. Blackberry is trying the same approach by forcing people to sign up to PayPal. There is an awful lot of forcing being done here... And as seen with Blackberry, PayPal on mobile is not a good consumer experience...
The payment method that delivers the highest consumer success on mobile is carrier billing - by a VERY long way. As you mention, the carrier already has the billing relationship which makes it easy for them, but it's a nightmare trying to set up billing relationships with all the worlds carriers...
Fortunately there are experts that have already done the hard work - Bango for example has a web-based mobile billing solution that directly uses carrier billing connections. It also automatically identifies the customer and lets them purchase with a single click (no registration or login required). Bango also does credit card and PayPal billing, so why don't more of the app stores use Bango for billing?
Is it the belief that payout rates alone matter most? It is easy to show how a few percent extra on conversion rate gives significantly more than a few percent on the payout rate. Given the high conversion rates, the carriers can certainly afford to keep a little more back, but some appear to just be gready. For example, how can UK carriers pay out between 75% and 90% while the US carriers still pay between 50% and 65%? Is that the cost of the certification you mention? Being the billing channel is a great benefit the carriers bring, but they need to start thinking like the credit card companies.
Wow! What a seriously sensible article. Spot on reality.
I've been developing apps and selling MP3's and videos to mobile users for 5 years. I've been on decks / portals - as you say you spend more time fighting the store keeper's own brand products and loony ideas than building your products, and everybody you bring to your product gets brouight to everybody else's!
I've tried the previous generations of app stores, but all of them fizzle out quickly and become proxies for some goliath content provider. Noki's last "download" link - their 2005 "App store" turned into a front for Jamster weekly subcription sign-ups, using dubious marketing and billing tactics.
I'm now doing my own mobile web site - focussing on the top 10 devices, buying traffic from Yahoo, Admoda, Admob, Google etc. and billing using carrier billing (via Bango) or providing content free where I can't bill effectively (India, France) just to build a base for later.
Apple is a no hoper for me. Apple uniquely blocks the download of games, music, videos from the internet (which is why users are FORCED to go to the app store). With my wide portfolio they see me as a competitor - so I'll concentrate on the other 96% of the market - and one day they will be forced to open up.
Sure I'll probably put a free app in the Ovi app store, luring people into my other properties - despite the prohibitions on doing so in the OVI T&C.
Within a few years the App stores will have faded away, and we will be following the PC model. Operators will make a shed load of money enabling billing - including subscriptions, and the OEM's will need to get back to making their devices easier and cheaper.
LL
I think what you're describing could well become the most successful model -- a mobile website to which you drive your own clicks through advertising, and where you transact the sale through a billing provider. While I admire Bango, Paypal and other solutions, I think ultimately the carriers will extend their billing APIs and that would be your preferred solution. We'll see!
Agree with most of the article, but you mention 3rd party testing houses as a "rip off." Because I am in the industry I know it is actually significantly cheaper to do QA with a third partner testing house then moving those costs internally for a carrier. The real question is why are the carriers so unwilling to cover some of the third parties cost!
Most importantly though, at the end of the day the app store is successful because of the iPhone. Your suggestion of dropping the minimum handset limit is a good one, not just because of certification costs, but also for the industry in general. Lower end handsets are trying to run applications way out of their league and making the whole thing tacky. Quality has to come into the ball game and between the horrendous storefronts and the low end handsets...its a problem.
Also suggest getting rid of companies which portend to represent developers to help them get onto a carrier deck. They have wormed their way into the system and don't offer much other than a fee.
I disagree with you here. Nokia has already made thousands of dollars from their app store and so will Microsoft. I think only 3 or 4 app stores will survive after the dust is settled.
Would you purchase an application from a carrier/app store which does not work properly? This is why QA and Certification processes are necessary.
Folks like Microsoft and Nokia are not going to spend millions if they know the app stores are going to fail. I would put my trust in them instead of someone who writes articles like these for a living and does not know much about running a successful business.
Holy cow! THOUSANDS of dollars??!!!! Already!?!? We're all gonna be rich!!
I agree with many of your points, but you miss the big reason for Apple's success. It's software baby. Most phones are far too limited in capabilities, and their software platforms are far too limited for developers to produce excellent applications, and the user experiences are horrible. I actually tried to buy some apps on my Verizon Env2, but the apps were terrible, and had to live somewhere that took a half dozen clicks to reach.
Apple's applications install directly in my phone for immediate access and use. They all share the same intuitive user interface components that I already know how to use. The billing is simple and smooth and a big advantage, but the actual usabity of the applications is a huge edge. No handset manufacturer has a clue about good software design, interface design, etc. Blackberry's software is a puzzle built from a kludge, each app on my curve worked differently. Microsoft proves over and over with every Windows PC and smartphone release that they only understand UI design well enough to copy others, had CPM not surrendered the PC market to DOS, we might not even remember the company.
Palm and Google are the only companies that might have a clue, and their installed bases are too tiny to make a difference.
Good article. A lot of the points you make are old, but I don't mean that as a knock in any way - it's the core reason app stores even materialized! Carriers are still trying to figure out how to recklessly monetize every bit of content they can in order to bump that precious data ARPU, and even more dangerous, they've allowed publishers to dictate what re-occurring value means.
I remember being laughed at by the carriers for suggesting that there be a selection of games and apps at a much lower price point in order to bring in first time buyers. Now, I think we can say that the 1.99 app does in fact work, and there are still some titles that are selling for 5.99 and up. The prediction was that once someone paid for a 2 dollar app, they would never again pay for a 6 dollar app. I know plenty of real users who have now purchased more complex and expensive apps because they were willing to try out a "cheaper" app.
I also think that everyone that is trying to develop a competitive or mirror strategy to the Apple App Store is missing a key factor. Cool. Cool sells better than any marketing strategy I know of to the hip app buyers of the world. Those hip app buyers then sell to the rest of the Joe's because they aspire to BE those hipsters (don't lie to yourselves!). Until someone can develop a store and a device that is cooler than the iPhone / App Store, everything will fail to measure up, and fail to survive.
Hopefully that means Nokia is developing another dedicated nGage device to make another effort at taco talking, and the Gizmondo lives! :) I kid because I love.



SHARE
WITH:
Comments (9) | Post a comment