Welcome to Sad Salvation. Day by day by day by day ... this is my attempt to make sense of the world.

Current | Archives

Friday, June 19, 2009

The double edge sword of subscription mobile apps

I think that Apple is playing with a double edged sword when it comes to subscription iPhone apps. One thing that I have hated about Verizon is that they want to charge a fee for everything. Just about every add on app for my non-smart LG phone comes with a monthly fee. non of these apps are valuable enough for me to want to pay every month for it.

The reason that cell phone carriers have been very attractive businesses is because they get reoccurring monthly revenue from most of their customers. Most MBA's eyes get big when they think they can get the same kind of revenue for their business. Lots of people want to sell you service that you have to pay every month to get. Sometime I think business people see a greater ROI by having a subscription business and end up chasing a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow they cannot find.

There are a class of apps that can come to the iPhone with a subscription service that would never come with a one time purchase model. Subscription apps really open up the kind of content based apps we will see. I think this is a good thing for mobile platforms and content providers.

The problem is that you run the risk of turning off your customers. For years now there have been backlash toward subscription services. People are already paying too many monthly bills. While a service like Netflix has done well, subscription music service and sat radio business have not done well. The value proposition has to be in line with customers expectations.

The reason this is a concern for Apple is because they have put themselves in charge of their ecosystem. The iPhone is popular in part because of the app store. It is not an open market, it is a market that Apple guides and controls. If developers start turn off iPhone customers, this can effect how people think of Apple and the iPhone in the end. It is a very tricky situation.

I am in a part of my life where very little is worth another subscription. I was willing to pay for the MLB app, because paying $10 at the start of each season is easier to budget, that playing $2 a month for the baseball season. I guess it is all about how the users thing of their finances.

Labels: apps, business, iphone, mobile apps

- Rich, 8:47 PM

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

iPhone Apps and Content

There is a post on Gizmodo about how they are starting to see single band apps pop up on the iPhone store. The person who wrote the article thought this is lame. It is easy to see how this could end up in 100s of apps being on the store and an average fan buying dozens of these apps.

I am not surprised this is happening. It is a result of the business rules of the app store and of the apps. A customer can only be charged once per app. That means that there is no other way for the record labels to charge you every time the content is updated. There is no way to charge people through a single app. The content provider is forced to send the customer back to the app store and buy a new app.

I am not against the record company charging me for new content when it comes out, I just don't like the idea of needing 40 apps to listen to the bands I like. I already blogged about how apps have short life spans. So putting out new apps sounds like a good thing. This is new and it seems like there is a lot to be worked out in this business model.

As a customer, if there are songs I can get on the app, I want them in my iTunes collection also. I would want to be able to listen to them in other context also. Not just in that app alone.

Labels: apps, business, content, Gizmodo, iphone

- Rich, 11:07 PM

Monday, February 23, 2009

iPhone life and times

I found this entry about the lifespan of Apple iPhone apps. If you go and look at the source information, you will find even better information. There are some very interesting about what to do with your ads. My guess is that this information was not really finally in yet. I have the feeling that these models will change a lot over the next two years.

I have read a lot about how the iPhone Apps store is changing the game when it comes to software. I think that the info on these slides only tell part of the story. There needs to be more information about how much profit these apps make. I know that companies release free apps to extend their brands. I am not sure where that fits on this list.

Labels: apps, iphone

- Rich, 7:33 AM

Monday, September 15, 2008

The Problem with Rejecting Apps

I read a story on about how the iPhone app podcaster was rejected from the apps store. It was rejected because the features were close to the iTunes Desktop feature set. The difference is that you cannot currently use the iPhone to directly download podcasts. This app allowed you to directly download podcasts to the iPhone.

I know the argument is that Apple has the right to control there platform. The problem is that Apple has set rule, but they are not letting people know what the rules are.

Apple had nothing in the terms prohibiting developers from duplicating features currently available on desktop application. I followed all the guidelines and made sure everything is in the correct place. Yet Apple denies me because I allow users to download podcasts just like iTunes.

If you want app developers to be in business with you, you need to be clear about what the rules are. Apple is going to go through a lot of growing pains with iPhone apps. They have does something truly innovative with the way they are handling mobile apps. The problem is that they leave the door open for other smart phone makers if they restrict too many apps.

Labels: apple, apps, iphone, podcast, podcaster

- Rich, 2:38 PM

Current | Archives

Contact me