33 cents a day seems worth it to connect. Perhaps most telling is the automated response telling concerned users they could get rid of the paywall if they redownloaded the old version and still use those coveted features until August 1.įor daily users the option to upgrade is 33 cents a day to stay un touch with people who matter most in their lives. This changed the entire user experience of the app, and increase the sting to those who wanted to stay with a freemium version. It took existing features that the entire userbase had gotten used to and they placed them behind a paywall. Not only did Marco Polo fall directly into the qualitative-limiation of free-plan category, it added salt to the wound by having the restricted features be those that were previously available to all users. This is especially important in social driven applications (more on that later). By putting quantitative limitations on a free plan- rather than qualitative limitations, you reduce the stigma of a freemium member having "less than", or having a worse experience. This allows users to have the full and awesome experience of the app, but require upgrade for higher volume usage. When an app is experienced-driven, it typically best practice to limit a free plan by quantity- not by features. 2) FLAWED PREMIUM STRUCTURE The tone-deaf messaging was only made worse by the inherently flawed premium-release structure of Marco Polo. Being deafly positive can be nauseating and come off as inhumane, and certainly automated. MP: Here's an article about my new features!! Positivity is good. It plays out, time and time again, like this: People: Ridiculous! MP: we're giving you something good! People: We hate this! MP: You are going to like it soon! People: Why? I hate it now. We are excited about the new features." or possibly worse of all - AVOIDING the answer. Even when users expressed clear disappointment and frustration, responses would take a nonchalant tone like: "change is hard" "we're sorry to hear your disappointment. In app, twitter and social media comments, Marco Polo began repeating again and again that they were giving a more premium experience. But the LANGUAGE and DELIVERY was also incredibly flawed. We'll dig in more later on the issues of the actual features. By using language like "elevated experience" and ignoring the fact they are making users pay for things they already had, it comes across as disingenuous- as though MarcoPolo is trying to dupe users- a feeling no one enjoys. So, MarcoPolo is TELLING its users that it is unlocking premium features and giving them an elevated experience and saying "yay! finally this is here" but really, users regular experience has been significantly downgraded. The primary experience of most users was having their top-used features firewalled. The main message- copy and pasted everywhere from their app homepage to their twitter responses read: 1) TONE-DEAF MESSAGING As though they took a page from "Autoresponses & Gaslighting 101", Marco Polo's Premium App messaging totally missed the mark. If you want to know how Marco Polo was basically a lesson in how NOT to launch your premium app version. The news did NOT go over well with its cult-like following, with many users fleeing to competing apps or writing up gripes online. This month, after claiming it needed to finally find a revenue model, the app launched an expanded paid version for $10/month. its highest ASSUMPTION coming during the pandemic. Video Messaging app Marco Polo has had a rollercoaster of adoption since its 2012 launch, with an impressive increase in 2016 - but by far its highest and most rapid adoption period has been the pandemic- boasting a 6 fold increase in downloads from February to March this year- just as the quarantine rules were being lain.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |