We can’t really go back
Justine Pratt from Creative Algorithms wrote a brilliant piece on the history of mobile app distribution. She is making some excellent points on why despite all the problems, the Apple App Store still beats any other distribution system we have seen so far.
Although I saw the irony in Justine’s title (and I double-checked with her just to make sure its not only me seeing the sarcasm), with the way she ends her post I had a question in my mind: If things get worse, could we actually go back to using the App Store as a passive distribution vehicle? Or different, could one distribute apps without (counting on) the charts as a sales mechanism?
I know I am not the only one with that thought, especially as things get worse through the huge flood of apps we see these days, all fighting for the charts. A really good first analysis was given in Marco Ament’s famous blog post about the two App Stores, so I won’t repeat that here. But I want to emphasize one thought on both the idea of “going back to just using the distribution” or “going with App Store B”. And to forewarn you, it is not a nice thought.
No matter which approach you take, you will be listed in an environment that has a huge reputation with consumers for its killer low pricing structure. You can’t just decide you will take the “App Store B” route and “go back” to classic mobile app prices, $20, $40 or more. If you decide to try your luck without the chart gamble, that is not a carte blanche to set whatever price you want. You will most likely need to slash your pricing very significantly from what you would have done in any classic distribution channel.
Why? Too many small and big developers already did that. The expectation from customers is pretty much set. Setting a price that you would have called “regular” just a year ago will be perceived by your customer base in a way you neither want nor typically can afford, no matter how well you argue. In my career, I never saw a customer being receptive to statements that basically say “my prices are high because I am not selling a lot”. Really meaning “I am not successful”.
A reduced price is the real challenge of going back to classic distribution or taking your chances with App Store B. And while this might sound obvious, the consequences are much harsher than anybody seems to be ready to accept.Because when you skip the volume triggers of the App Store but still have a reduced price, you have a real ROI challenge for any project.
Summary: Achieving a (significant) chart position these days is getting harder and harder. NOT gunning for it is creating a business and success scenario for your app that makes almost any other platform look more desirable. And I agree to what Marco hints at, if you are a game developer, forget about path B right away. The only exception I can see at this point are highly specialized apps or extremely low budget apps.
So if you HAVE to aim at the charts, then you are part of the lottery game that Justine describes, especially if you are an independent developer without a lot of additional marketing support. Plus you have to get the pricing right.
Executive Summary: We can’t go back. Prices are ruined and success without a chart success will be possible for only very few exceptions.
Crouching iDragon – Why the iPhone is no success in China
Had a very eye-opening discussion with a China based developer today. Asking if he is going to buy a 3GS as a testing device, he told me that he indeed visited a Unicom Shop to check for prices yesterday.
With a sobering result.
“Official” iPhones are sold without Wifi in China and at a price that is 15% higher than the established black market price. Wifi is a killer feature as there is also no unlimited data plan. And with two million devices sold through the black market, this is far from being a sleazy or unorganized structure. In fact that market is well established and accessible to everybody, including services to get you the apps you want.
This failure has nothing to do with Chinese mentality, which I experienced to be a very honest if given a chance. But a 15% higher purchase price for a crippled device lacking one of the most essential features, after such a long waiting time? This current strategy is bound to fail and I wonder who came up with it in the first place. Almost strikes me as staged.
Are you thinking about translating your apps? Think again.
How to use a Droid as Android Developer Phone
Sometimes it takes a new experience to I ask myself: “What was I thinking before?”
Unpacking my new Droid, trying to set it up for development was one of those moments, where after the first hurdle I was like “oh no”, remembering lively how many curveballs the Apple environment throws at you there.
For the sake of the exercise, let’s quickly repeat how to setup an iphone as a developer phone: Search google for “provisioning”, “iphone developer phone”, “certificate”, “profiles”, etc. Read all you can find on the developer portal. Prepare with large amounts of coffee, blankets and lot’s of time. When everything is setup, search google for “problem with provisioning”, “0xE8000001″, “reboot”, “reinstall”. Prepare to do this every other month.
Here is what you have to do for a Droid: open “settings”, “applications”,”development” on the phone and enable “usb debugging”. Prepare mentally for the phone to say: “DROID”. The device is now ready to be used as a developer phone in Eclipse and with adb.
In all fairness, make sure you have the latest usb driver as described here on the official Android Developer site.
And in even more fairness, please remember the Apple system is much more geared towards avoiding piracy. Trust me, after a few months you will find this normal and not question the system anymore. Until.
Announcing: Space Master
Update: Space Master released and got amazing reviews the first days, you can download it here.
I am very proud to announce the upcoming release of our biggest game production yet: Space Master
Space Master - Moon Level
Space Master - Mars Level
From the iTunes description:
Space Master is taking the line drawing genre to a whole new level.
You’ve guided planes and mastered boats. Yet in Space, you need more skills to claim success!
Are you ready to engage in the challenging career of a Space Master? Land your space vessels on five different planets and secure Earth’s resources.Consider distance, speed and angle of each ship, then draw a line to fire the thrusters. Catch a falling ship until it hovers, move it sideways, let it fall freely before giving it a final burst to land safely, all triggered with you drawing a single line. Before you know it, this natural and unique approach will get you conducting an elegant and beautiful ballet in space.
Unique gameplay:
- find creative ways to land your ships
- the line you draw will precisely dictate which thruster fires and when
- master the art of landing your ships with a single line out of the most impossible situations
Innovative Features:
- health bar shows how many ships you are allowed to crash
- gather energy over time. Choose wisely between auto-landing a group of ships or refilling your crash allowance
- featuring five levels with four soundtracks
- challenge your friends through Openfeint
Please enjoy our unique approach to bring line-drawing and gravity together!
The cost of a snack – understanding the $0.99 mindset
Every day, there is more and more evidence that all types of people feel entitled to receive a lot of app value for $0.99. And there is more and more evidence that developers dislike this. A lot. From a NYT article stating that “it’s ok as long as it costs $0.99″ to a developer raising the price to $39.99 to protest customers arguing the $2.99 original price tag, to celebrities not liking the Tweetie Update path, to smart and clever little games like Canabalt losing momentum because of not leaving their $2.99 path.
One approach I found working for me, trying to understand the phenomenon, was to embrace the idea of: “App Snacking”
I don’t remember where I heard the term first, I just think it beautifully describes how people purchase apps these days. No matter if you look at the current Top Paid Charts or study sales numbers from those developers who publish theirs, or read through related blog entries like Appy Entertainments wonderful Hummingbird Manifesto, the comparison with snacking is very imminent.
What are some of the signature items marking a “snack”?
- Spontanous decision to buy
- Satisfying, short enjoyable burst
- Everybody does it, but it comes with some degrees of guilt
- Low price
The first one is clearly enabled by Apple’s Appstore, allowing for the first time such spontanous buying decisions on a device. Neither would I be writing this nor would you be reading this without Apple compacting every bit of experience of the frontrunners of digital purchases, like Amazon, into their itunes flow and their little devices.
Buying a great app is certainly a satisfying, joyful experience, esp. those providing you with a really small learning curve and instant gratification.
On the guilt part, we need to realize: video games just break out some more of their classic, limited zone. Continuing an effort that Nintendo began in the eighties, taking games from smoky bars into our living rooms. Plus, spending money makes you feel guilty these days, no matter what you spend.
And that is the point I am trying to make. All of this would not have been possible without the $0.99 price tag. There is no chicken and egg here. First there was the low price. Then people started to buy like nobody would have ever guessed in their wildest dreams. And they never looked back and they continue buying!
As developers, we have to understand and embrace this behavior. For my own pricing strategy, it seems clear that there is the broad market of $0.99 purchasing users. Those who snack. Those who buy a lot of apps. When I go up to 1.99, I am already starting to leave this segment. Everything starting with 2.99 requires a real (and quite different) purchase decision process for most users.
Check for yourself: When you really just want to buy a new, quick and nice app for some evening entertainment, did you ever find yourself going into “Featured” and then quickly going down the list of potential candidates by narrowing to the $0.99 games first? I think that is when you share the mindset of your typical customer! Those are the apps you can buy without any perceived guilt.
I also think we have to learn to do the reverse math. The fact that people are buying so many apps (I think we avg 18 per month), even with $0.99, adds up to a quite significant number every month. 2.99 already starts to stick out there. 4.99 is the monthly (quarterly?) exception. And just as a sidenote, I will never understand how anyone can price their apps at 5.99, it violates the most basic experience any industry has made with psychological pricing.
Now don’t get me wrong, I am NOT saying everybody should price at $0.99. I have a clear roadmap for some of my apps that will lead to a higher price tag. But I am planning this consciously, providing a certain value to a certain user base, where I am pretty sure that base will be willing to spend a higher amount. And different than what I perceive communicating with other devs, I am well aware I am aiming at a niche.
And this is what I am trying to do and invite you to do the same: Understand that yes, with a $0.99 app you will hit a tough crowd of merciless reviewers expecting an incredible, flatout unfair value for that price. But you will also hit a crowd that is buying a LOT of apps every day. And that’s because of the $0.99 tag.
Disclaimer: I am neither saying I like the price race to the bottom nor am I suggesting a specific pricing strategy. I do like the purchase behavior I am seeing though. And I am trying some early analysis on what we are seeing every day and everybody has to make their own conclusions on what that means for pricing. We need to try to understand the dynamics of the marketplace. Don’t fight a newly crystallizing consumer behavior, try to use it to your advantage. Don’t fight Windmills (couldn’t resist on that one 
.
Kindly check out my new upcoming game, will announce any day now (@Markusn on Twitter). It will be just $0.99, so even if you buy a lot of apps… you know what I mean.
iV2’s – on App Upgrading
Let me make one thing clear: I love paid upgrades.
One of the greatest achievements of the software industry has been to educate users that they have to pay for new features.
Free is unsustainable
It’s also one of the best mechanisms a software company can use to create a sustainable business, growing both their product and customer base, monetising the latter to finance that growth.
Indeed, I’ve always thought seeing if someone is able to demonstrate a good solution to this part of the software business provides a great 10 second acid test to judge any venture.
Equally, my general experience has been that a customer who values your product and wants new features is willing to pay a fair upgrade price – although they’ll never say so out loud.
In this context, I think not offering a paid update path within the App Store is one of Apple’s few mistakes.
There is evidence it had plans to enable this but that after realising how valuable updates were in terms of providing developers with a mechanism for highlighting their apps in the App Store charts, it hasn’t been in a rush to implement the feature.
Turning of the tide
The subject is now a hot discussion point however thanks to the decision of the developer of the Tweetie app to charge for its next, feature-rich release. Although tempting, I don’t want to join that discussion.
Instead, I want to share some out-of-the-box thoughts about how I plan to implement both paid upgrades and high value (or Gold) editions of my apps within the existing ecosystem. Because, while I want Apple to create a clean paid upgrade path, I think the App Store currently provides mechanisms to do so.
The paid upgrade path
The problem is straightforward: how can you introduce a new version of your app at a certain price, while the existing users of the old version pay a lower price?
My solution is simple: Introduce the new version and, for a certain time period, reduce its price while informing the app’s user base, giving them a chance to buy the new version for a reduced price.
Of course, new users will be able to buy the new version for the reduced price in that time period. Let me also explain why I think that can be a good thing.
Tell them what you’re doing
There’s the issue of how to inform your existing user base.
You can do this using an in-app newsline, as already used in games such asDoodle Jump, Scoops, my own Super Memory Match etc, and/or with a newsletter.
How it works
The beauty of this concept is it hooks into the feature the App Store encourages in terms of instant price changes and a paid chart that is based on sales numbers, not revenue i.e. PegglingTM.
This is the practise of dropping the price of your app for a limited time period to encourage users to buy it, which pushes it up the charts and in turn encourages more sales.
The key to classic PegglingTM is to make sure lots of people know about the price cut; something that’s also an important part of my paid upgrade solution path. See how everything comes together?
As a practical example, Tweetie v1 could receive a small update which implements a newsline feature. This would initially say, “Thank you for buying Tweetie“.
Prior to the release of Tweetie v2, it would change to, “Tweetie 2 coming soon! Tweetie users get a special upgrade price. Click here to sign up”.
This would lead to a simple online newsletter subscription form with more text explaining that Tweetie 2 will be introduced at a special price as a courtesy to existing customers and that the timeframe for this promotion will be announced via email newsletter.
Tweetie 2 is then introduced for the introductory price, existing customers are informed and everybody is happy. (Actually a lot of customers will find a lot of reasons to be unhappy, but the premise of this post is a lot less will be unhappy than if you try other solutions.)
Advanced tweaks
There are also some fine tunings you can apply thanks to the flexible mechanisms of the App Store:
1. You can lower the price of your first version to reflect the difference in price at the moment you announce the update in the newsline. In the example, Tweetie 1 could go down to $0.99 if the introductory price will be $1.99 or vice versa.
2. Some customers are left out. No problem, you have a great answer: Get them to sign up so they’ll never miss a future promotion, and repeat the update path – and the promotion – several times in the future. It will, of course, be a pure coincidence if you time this whenever version 2 drops in the charts.
3. This situation doesn’t solve the problem of having two versions of your app in the App Store. However you can permanently reduce the price for version 1 once version 2 is out and re-offer the update promotion from time to time.
4. Yes. New customers can buy the new version for a reduced price as well as existing customers. There’s no way around this. However it is the very concept of peggling to give that advantage to some users to gain visibility for thousands of others later when the app is up in the charts.
5. There are additional variations. You can vary time the length of the reduced price time period. You can repeat it. If you have a potentially very successful next version coming up and you don’t think you need upfront promotions – such could be the case with Tweetie 2 – you can inform your user base that you will provide the upgrade path “soon” and try to maximise $2.99 sales before this happens.
Personally, I prefer to do this the other way around and get the damage out of the way with a pre-announced introductory sale limited to 24 hours as early after release as possible. In this way, you harvest the benefits of those expectedly high sales numbers and your chart position before you bring in the full price version. Then I would repeat the promotion much later at least one more time to satisfy the left out customer base.
Building a business
Now, this might strike you as a lot of work but it’s really not that dramatic. And it builds something that in my opinion might be over time worth more than some of your apps: an active newsletter base.
So while this approach isn’t traditional in terms of what currently happens on the App Store, it plays well with the tools we’ve been provided with.
If done effectively, I see no reason why you won’t end up with a consistent App Store offering as well as the least possible disgruntled user base, as users of your version 1 app will be still be paying you some money, while you’ll also be generating revenue from and a high chart position for version 2.
Be careful what you wish for – revenue based chart ranking
Filed under: apple, appstore, iphone | Tags: apple, appstore, iphone
Leave a Comment Appstore Approvals: The Good
My app got rejected.
That’s how most “Apple is the Evil” posts start today. And while I do join the hordes of protesters in the meantime, my first experience with the appstore approval process was actually very good. And as such stories are kind of rare, I wanted to share what happened:
Our app “Baby’s Animal Show” is probably one of the most innocent, harmless things out there in the appverse. Toddlers like it. And so do parents. It is basically a flashcard game / slideshow featuring a full-screen tap that even youngest kids master quickly. We use flickr common creative license pictures and cartoon pictures we did in house and I can guarantee we were really careful with those designs to not make them similar to anything existing. Our first submission went without problems and we got good reviews & sales.
Four weeks later we submitted an update with two more animals and some nice additional functionality, allowing to disable animals from the show. With the thought of allowing users to adjust the game for cultural specific preferences or simply disable that one animal that Baby doesn’t like or fear. Harmless features.
Seven days into the approval process we got the “review delayed” email from Apple, which generally means something is not right.
Ten days into the process we get the email stating that we violate an existing trademark of a major player in the licensed content arena. Kind of vague. Sent email back with a request for clarification and spent a whole evening looking at each cartoon animal, trying to find out if we got too close to something trademarked. Asked ten people for their opinion and got ten different answers.
The next day we got an email with further clarification and a screenshot and it was… our start screen??
Yep. It was the title font. Our outsourcing team chose something that was not only close but an exact duplicate of the main font of that major player. At least they have a good taste. Hmm.
What can I say?
Not much, other then: Thank you, Apple, for catching that!
The point I am trying to make: Such things can happen, even in well controlled environments, even in big corps, certainly in startups. It is the typical chain of coincidences and what you typically do is to make sure it never will happen again. And move on. Which we did but I can also tell you I was damn glad that the Apple reviewer caught that. And when I look into some of those really naive posts you see sometimes in the iphone developer forums, I wonder how many lives Apple saves daily with that process of filtering out potential trademark issues before they hit the market.
Now while that is good, don’t get me wrong. I think it actually makes the bad things of the review process even look worse. Inconsistencies from trying to interpret the idea of “objectionable content” case by case, failing badly doing so. And the take-it-or-leave-it one-way communication. It is a shame how Apple allows those to ruin a concept that in itself is not necessarily a bad approach.
Next Gen iphone Homescreen revealed
(Note: The following post is purely satirical and captures my frustration about the inconsistencies of Apple’s approval processes. Things are slowly changing for the good
Rumor has it that the next generation of the popular iphone will see a severe reduction of pre-installed apps. The new Homescreen will basically only be populated with two standard icons, Weather and Settings.
All other apps failed the appstore approval process this time, as examples:
- Text: Text messages cost extra, however an app can not create revenue outside of itunes
- Calendar: The reviewer was successfully creating a test appointment using objectionable words
- Photos: The reviewer was able to successfully load pictures of non-dressed humans
- Camera: The reviewer was able to successfully take a picture of a broken glass which when viewed with great imagination appears as if the iphone screen is broken which might confuse users
- Youtube: Obvious
- Stocks: The Apple stock going down might be confusing for customers
- Maps: Searching for the “F***” word shows results in almost any city (it’s true! try it)
- Safari: Very obvious
- Mail: After 10 seconds reading spam the decision was easy
- Phone: The reviewer was able to successfully call an escort service.
- Generally the homescreen of the new iphone is too similar to the old iphone which might confuse customers
According to insider sources, Apple is trying hard to get more of their pre-installed apps approved. However, all they get from the review team is a standardized email answer so they don’t know what to change. They now try to get at least the “phone” app in by constantly resubmitting it, hoping for a new reviewer that does not yet understand how the approval process works.
Which really means: Any of them.
