Future of the App: What Winning Apps do right

Only 6 Percent end up staying on featured lists of the Apple App Store or Google Play according to L2 Think Tank research. How can a company make an app investment worthwhile?

According to the stats, building a winning app is a long shot these days. About two in five apps never get reviewed by consumers, sending them to the graveyard before they even have a chance to entertain or bore an audience. In fact,

In a June 4 Town Hall at the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) headquarters in Manhattan, panelists from major media companies joined experts in monetization to discuss the "Future of the App." Apparently that future isn't so bright for companies hoping to succeed without the right strategy for an app these days.

Apps that adapt quickly

Jon Steinback, Head of Product at Foursquare, explained how the company's new Swarm app will allow users who aren't into some aspects of the original app to interact with friends on a meaningful level.

"The reason we did the split [adding Swarm] was because people were using the app in two different ways," Steinback explained. "You're looking for a place for dinner, you open up Foursquare and find a place. After dinner, you open it up to see where your friends are."

Steinback described it as "having two apps in one," a situation that was confusing users to the point that it became a distraction. Foursquare's approach allows social users to interact without having to be foodies or cocktail enthusiasts per se. This specificity warranted a second app in the brand's vision.

The apps no one should build

Data recently released by Flurry found 32 percent of all mobile Internet time spent is in gaming apps while another 28 percent of time occurs within social media apps. By comparison, just 14 percent of smartphone and tablet Internet time is spent using the mobile web browser on their devices. Clearly the question of whether to invest time and money in building a mobile app or apps requires strategic thinking beyond the topline time-spent metrics.

Doron Wesly, Tremor Video's Head of Market Strategy, used PepsiCo as an example (Wesly noted he was not knocking the Pepsi brand in general) of the type of app companies ought not to build.

"I don't really know why I would need the Pepsi Max app on my phone," Wesly pointed out. "What am I going to do with that? Go to CVS and buy a Pepsi? Not really...There is a clear reason to be or not to be [an app]."

The difficulty with CPG-company apps came in the transaction. You can't buy cans of soda or candy bars via an app because you need retail store and credit card apps to facilitate. On the other hand, a company such as Starbucks has a definite purpose and value for an app, in that it facilitates transacting in-store and extends the brand’s footprint to anywhere its customers happen to be.

Mistakes app developers make

Gil Dudkiewicz, CEO of StartApp, brought up reasons developers can turn off consumers before the app has a chance to catch fire.

"If you ask for too many things in the login process, it will make users avoid registering with you," Dudkiewicz said. "If you have too many advertisements, if you try to monetize too heavily in the beginning, it will not go well."

Dudkiewicz brought up earlier in the discussion how apps tend to get traction in a very crowded marketplace (what the panel called the "discoverability" factor). He mentioned whether or not it was a "featured" app in Google Play or the Apple App Store, whether it came as part of a cross promotion or (most of all) whether it had advertising dollars behind it.

Though the "Future of the App" event was dedicated to isolating the advantages and disadvantages of mobile web vs. apps, Gil Dudkiewicz reminded the audience that it's impossible to have an either/or approach.

"If you are a serious company, you have to have both," Dudkiewicz said.

Considering the odds stacked against apps getting awareness, attention, downloads, and regular use, it's not a job to take lightly.

SOURCE: IAB.