Skip to content


AppStore SchmappStore

Before diving into this article, let me give you an idea of where I am coming from. I bought my first PDA in 1996 – the original Palm Pilot, and immediately started looking for apps and believed I Handango was just live then (or it may have been some other site).  In 2001, I was part of acquiring a company called Digimob, which ran midletcentral.com, the first site with apps for the only downloadable J2ME supported handset in the world (outside of Japan), the Motorola A008.  I founded a company in late 2002 – MoConDi, whose business was to run content storefronts on behalf of mobile operators, with online sign up for a 1000+ strong community of developers. So I am somewhat familiar with the concept of an AppStore.

What I find puzzling is that the success of Apple’s AppStore is now spurring an “AppStore mania” among mobile operators and the like. Suddenly they have all seen the light and realized an AppStore is the answer!  Surely, there must be people at Handango pulling their hair out by now (and anyone who knows me knows that my hair is thinning as well, partially because we had such a hard time explaining to potential customers the benefits of creating the mobile developer eco-system we had at MoConDi even with an astounding success case as a customer… oh well).  There has never been a doubt that consumers want access to games and apps – but lately it almost seems like (at least if you read the big media), that we needed Apple to tell us this?  Well, as an industry veteran who has spent a lot of time and effort in trying to educate potential customers about this for the last 8 years, I am not ready to say “I told you so yet”.  Let’s take a look at what this AppStore “trend” get’s right:

1. People want apps. Clearly. Anyone in the mobile industry knows this, but the main issue has always been about discoverability and the cost (read: data charges and time consumed looking for them). What Apple has shown – although this is not exactly a secret – is that if you make it dead easy for people to find and pay for something cool, people will. They did it with MP3, and it can hardly be a surprise they did it once they had made a phone.

2. They offer decent revenue models. Gee whiz. This has been a bone of contention for such a long time.  I wrote about this in 2003 in my “Mobile Downloadable Content” white paper (see Research section), and again in a post entitled “Mobile Content Revenue Models – Still an Issue“.  It seems now that a 70/30 split is becoming somewhat of a standard to succeed. Well, again, I have time and time again mentioned the Norwegian market who introduced this split in 2000, causing the market to explode.  And in Japan, DoCoMo has passed 91% back to content providers for ages. Why does it take Apple to teach people this? Does basic microeconomics understanding not exist in the industry?  Ok, I do not want to sound too grumpy here, but I am shocked how long it has taken for certain players to realize this. And yet I still think the rest of the industry will only slowly realize this.

So now it may seem like App Stores will solve it all, right?  Well, unfortunately not.  There are a number of issues that need to be addressed before downloading and installing apps on your phone becomes main stream. This is due to a large number of factors (this list is not intended to be exhaustive, just writing a few. Comments welcome):

a) Sun.  Yes, the makers of Java – who wanted to make this so open really screwed up J2ME.  By allowing each handset maker and each operator even to manipulate how they implement J2ME, they created a nightmare for developers. The Java Community Process has worked hard to standardize how APIs are used, and things have improved for sure, but it is still tough as more and more features are put into phones.  This has resulted in apps having to modified by not only screen size, but capability – and many users cannot get certain apps if they do not have the right handset).

b) Money and style.  The two primary reasons why people choose a phone.  While the iPhone is great, I seriously doubt Apple will ever outsell Nokia in terms of units sold. The Razr V3 is among the most widely distributed phones in the US, 3 years after it was released – all because people thought it looked cool.  Most people do not have smartphones with big screens. Phones are small, and often cumbersome to use for web navigation. They do not have wifi built in, thus rely on data plans and proper set-up for accessing internet.

c) Data plans. Unfortunately all you can eat data plans are not the norm. In many countries, people pay ridiculous sums per MB of data.  One of my previous clients, although not charging for MBs on their portal, charged users EUR 0.09 per page click. No wonder people are not looking for apps.  It is too expensive.  In fact, Mblox just announced that a typical data charge to buy an mp3 song can be as much as GBP 10.  Until prices come down to a bare minimum and people have all you can eat plans, all the App Stores in the world will not change much for the majority of mobile users.

d) The gatekeepers. Most mobile operators have product managers that decide what goes on deck. And most of them are either doing a terrible job or are in the pockets of the big publishers. This may sound rough on the product managers, but given the fact stats show that about 3% of people have downloaded a game, while 25% have played a game preloaded (source: M:Metrics), you know there is a gap in terms of how you manage the store.  Of course it is not just the product managers, as they normally have little influence on the technical platform their employers choose, thus were often left with a poor tool chest to manage the store. Few operators know how to optimize what I call the world’s smallest retail store, as they provide static hard to navigate wap sites.  At MoConDi, we reached 25% penetration of the customer base at our peak with our games store, and one app, a content sharing app, was downloaded by 12% of the user base. You can read more about this in the white paper “Sharing on a small screen” which is in the Research section.  The point is though, that by managing the store well, you will see traction.

The fact of the matter is that there is absolutely nothing novel about the App Store concept.  In fact, BlackBerry owners and Windows Mobile owners, who tend to be tech savvy people, know exactly where to go to get cool stuff.  What Apple is brilliant at is managing a closed eco-system – but their success does not necessarily transfer to others trying to replicate it towards the general mobile phone owner.  But if Apple’s success has opened the world to just two things – change the revenue models towards content providers and flat rate data plans – we may actually see the start of something beautiful…

Posted in Mobile Entertainment, The Business of Mobile.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


Lessons From TruTap

14,5m in funding, and TruTap has raised the red flag and are entering survival mode. What has the 14,5m gotten them in terms of traction? 250.000 users. Now this is of course registered users, not necessarily active users.

I recently discussed this with a number of industry colleagues. Several key issues were pointed out:

1.The service is not unique. It had to much “me too” flavor to compete against social networks
2.They used Java (J2ME) as a platform. J2ME is notoriously difficult to maintain and upgrade, and is inflexible to use for sudden changes and ideas such as promotions etc
3.The complete lack of a business model
4.They tried to do too much (i.e. dominate across several categories – feeds, IM, social network, picture upload). The argument is they should have picked a sub-category and dominated it. One argued that they were probably forced to go broad by their VC who demand “world domination”

Well, the arguments are certainly good ones, and follow this industry you would have heard them all (especially one about the lack of a business model, which I will address in a later article when we go live here at Storyz with ours :). However, there are some nuances to this:

Argument # 1 and #4 are quite similar. Try to do too much and go up against big guns you will get hurt. I agree. No new start-up will dominate social networking, whether on mobile or web, because the established big guns have it. This is true, however one of my colleagues correctly pointed out that TruTap was more of a tool than a social network, yet on TruTap’s home page they sell themselves as a social network. I.e. disappoint users from day one.

In my opinion, the idea behind TruTap is a good one (in fact, an Australian start-up, Xumii, based themselves on the same idea but with a “tool” mindset instead of a social network mindset). The problem however lies in execution. I do not mean the management is not clever – because the consensus is they are – but they are missing two fundamental aspects:

1.You need to think cross-platform (i.e. web, wap, etc). Mobile only focus will not cut it anymore. This especially goes for any service that has to do with messaging/social interaction. Our focus at Storyz goes way beyond this to ensure all media (video, pictures) is also completely cross platform, which also requires a deep understanding of mobile and web interaction.

2.Keep it simple. In all my years in mobile, I cannot tell how many times companies miss the boat on this. When the screen size shrinks the requirement for ease of use grows exponentially. Sure the iPhone is great, and they have lots of cool apps. Well the screen is huge – but most people (contrary to popular beliefs) do not have iPhones. They have small screen phones and like them because of their stylish looks (which explains why the V3 Razr is still so dominant). But companies still seem to forget this. My worst case example here is Yahoo Go (sorry Yahoo), which is an app which seemingly try to solve every conceivable need for information you have — all through the small screen. Well, it is not(!) working. Navigation is horrible, and the user experience worse. TruTap’s client was way too ambitious for most low end phone users. Compare Ebuddy, which has had 6,5m downloads on GetJar since beginning of last year. Yet TruTap has 250k users (and slightly above 500k downloads on GetJar). TruTap can do exactly what Ebuddy does, yet one has nearly 12 times the number of downloads off 1 single site! We have learned this lesson here at Storyz and ensure that our J2ME app looks a lot like your SMS inbox, and any action (such as creating a message with a picture) is carefully processed in a natural user flow.

There is one thing TruTap did well: Focus on complementing – not competing with – existing services. It is too hard to try to steal users with a me too service. I recently spoke to the CMO of one of the big social networks, and he confirmed their #1 priority is to steal users from other big SNs – so good luck with anyone trying to go head on here. You have to work within existing services (again, that is what we are focusing on here at Storyz by ensuring you can post and access everything you can create on whatever platform/site you prefer).

Lastly, I would like to somewhat defend J2ME as a platform (ignoring the fact that TruTap should have at a minimum have a complementing wap site to access the services) – J2ME is great for providing a great user experience if you do it right. By using the phone’s navigation pad or buttons, you can drastically ease navigation – and by adding transitions etc you can improve the user experience significantly to wap based services. You can also manage data far more clever than on wap. The trick is you need to know what to keep as server based functionality and what to keep as client based – so you can update your service frequently without having to make client changes. And you need to take advantage of phone integration, such as address book and camera access to smooth the user experience. All very difficult to do across a vast range of handsets – but it is alas what separates the cream from the crop.

My sympathy goes out to the TruTap team. I hope at least there are some lessons here to VCs and the market in general — these types of services can work if done right, but the margin of error is slim and can quickly cost you a quick 14m…

Posted in The Business of Mobile.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


The Death of Mobile Marketing?

It is an unavoidable discussion – the economy is bad and one starts to question the untried.  If you read the Financial Times, you cannot help getting the feeling that the article kind of implied that 1) mobile is not providing significant returns and 2) operators are making significant investments in mobile advertising. Both are not true. Mobile advertising today is far from significant, but is growing, and will continue to grow. The ROI on mobile campaigns have been quite high in many cases, but must not be seen in isolation but as part of an overall integrated campaign.

They are probably right in that growth will slow, but good ad campaigns will still launch in a tough economy, even on mobile.  Further gloom was cast by Moconews and the WSJ.  Especially this quote got my attention: “We won’t experiment in a lot of things that are fun to have. All of our dollars have to go to hitting in-market shoppers with the appropriate media,” Chrysler’s CMO Debarah Meyer told WSJ”.

Reading this, it seem  it is clear that the mobile marketing industry has a major problem if the selling point for mobile marketing is “fun”. The two articles really only shows ignorance towards the concept of mobile marketing. On the advertising side, I am not at all surprised that ad inventories are not getting full, because serving banner ads in an interactive device simply is not very compelling, especially since CPMs are so much more expensive than online. You need to have campaigns that engage the user, and use the interactive capabilities on the phone. Serving an ad does not fulfill that requirement.

So yes, no doubt that there will be a downturn in CPM based campaigns (or even simple CPA based campaigns).  What mobile marketing needs – whether in a downturn or not – is compelling campaigns that engage the user and with results that can be measured. There have been plenty of these campaigns around having been successful with SMS based interaction and simple wap sites.  What will truly open the eyes of the market though, are more multimedia based campaigns that spans web and mobile in a seamless experience. This is big part of what we are working on at www.storyz.com in terms of our advertising/sponsorship strategy, where users can earn loyalty points by signing up to sponsored campaigns, and their posts will be branded in a non-intrusive way.

Interestingly though, Sequoia’s commitment of nearly $16m in AdMob certainly seems like a nice vote of confidence in the concept of mobile advertising.  I posed the question of the possible death of mobile marketing to a number of industry colleagues. Aside from our natural industry bias, the consensus was pretty much that although some contraction in spending is likely to occur, we may actually see increased spending as mobile provides higher click through rates, better reach and more interactivity than the web.  However, a lot of emphasis was given to the fact that campaigns need to be measurable so that ROI can easily be calculated.

If you read my article clippings you will see a number of articles confirming this view. And although there have been negative articles forecasting the death of mobile marketing, there are numerous more being upbeat about the mobile as the channel.  I tend to agree – we may see a slight downturn, but the mobile as a marketing vehicle, providing the perfect personal extension to an integrated campaign – is both proven, here to stay, and will grow massively in the years to come.

Posted in Mobile Marketing.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .