With so much media attention paid to successful mobile applications, especially for the iPhone, it’s refreshing to read about less fortunate examples and how others might learn from their shortcomings.
A December 1, 2009 article on BrandWeek.com titled, “iPhone Apps Put Brands in Hands,” is a cleverly named piece describing the bandwagon that is the iPhone and highlights a number of successes. More interesting, I thought, were observations about less than successful apps that others should keep in mind as they approach mobile application projects.
By industry, the article highlights the following less than successful examples:
Retail: Gap’s StyleMixer was a terrific idea other retailers are employing or considering; the ability to create outfits based on clothing item combinations. Gap’s app failed to resonate because there were too few options for customers to create their custom fashions. Lesson learned: Understand how your customers want to use your application and interview a representative sample if necessary.
Banking: MasterCard’s Priceless Picks relies on user generated content which is moderated. Users panned the application, which appears to allow customers to post their “priceless” moments, per the well known advertising campaign. Users complained of censorship of posts and heavy advertising. Lesson learned: If the intent is to promote a “fun” application with a social element, be certain that you don’t disappoint customers by building an overtly ad supported and patently restrictive forum.
Consumer Packaged Goods: Budweiser built an application designed to help consumers find the nearest location their product could be purchased. While at first seemingly useful, the ubiquity of their product makes such an application seem unnecessary, which is how users reacted to it. Lesson learned: “Finder” style applications are popular but be certain such apps have utility for your targeted customer. In Buds case, it may have been w(e)iser to create an app which ties in store purchase promotions and a loyalty program designed to drive consumption.
Apparel: This one was out of left field. Puma created an application which allows users to track the financial performance of their portfolios against the backdrop of a model who removes clothes as the market falls. The sheer size of the application was its downfall, meaning it took too long to download. Lesson learned: Even if this app were easy to download, there appears to be no connection between the application’s intended use and the company’s products, to say nothing of its tastefulness.
Media: The Wall Street Journal app requires users to pay a weekly subscription fee, even if one is subscribed to the traditional online version. With so much news content freely offered online and in apps alike, charging a nominal fee such as this would seem to prevent widespread use, which has been the case. Lesson learned: If you charge for content that is similar to what others provide for free, reconsider your strategy and think about incorporating advertising to support the investment.
Restaurant/Food: Burger King created an iPhone application that allows customers to place orders, but only from one area of New York. The company has not yet rolled out the capability nationally, which is expected of a brand with locations everywhere in the U.S. Lesson learned: For national brands, ensure that if you create a geographically limited application you plan to either kill it or roll it out widely within a reasonable timeframe. From my POV, Starbucks, are you listening?
