

Google "not happy" with slow Android app sales - sovande
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/01/26/google_not_happy_with_slow_android_app_sales.html

======
andybak
Their recent fancy-pants redesign made everything prettier, slower, more
cluttered and added almost no new functionality.

One of the devs had the nerve to post about how clever the resolution-
independent swoosh at the top was. In my head I was yelling "stop fiddling
with that and fix the frikkin search!"

~~~
InclinedPlane
Indeed, the app-store is very un-googly at the moment. Google made their name
in search by providing the highest quality results, that's certainly not the
case with the app-store.

~~~
stretchwithme
their search results get more un-googly as time goes on as well.

------
markessien
Google has this idea in its head that the world should be html and web based.
It wants a big server infra-structure and almost non-existent clients, because
it IS a big server infrastructure. Google wants to be the platform that
everyone is building on top, and take away the thick clients.

Now, unfortunately for them, things don't seem to be swinging that way. The
chrome app store is a bust, chrome-os is not working and people by far prefer
the native apple app store, and the native apple apps to the server based
offerings.

However, google seems to not be paying attention to that. For their business,
it would make so much sense if everything were running "in the cloud". That's
what they would love, because they have the scale and opportunity to own this
market.

So they cripple Android app-selling, such that people don't bet too heavily on
'owned' native apps. They are trying to buy time till cloud based apps become
more prevalent - which frankly, is a really really long time from now.

~~~
orangecat
Everything I've seen from Google is that they're agnostic on native vs web
apps. They're happy as long as you're using Google services and looking at
Google ads.

------
mycroftiv
I believe there is an essential factor which isn't being articulated; the
different demographics and psychology of android phone purchasers vs. iphone
purchasers. I think Apple attracts a large portion of the "eager to spend
money on technology" customer base. If you are someone who is eager to spend a
lot of time playing with your phone, you are likely to buy an iphone. If you
want smartphone functionality but are not inclined to make a hobby of your
phone use, you are likely to buy an android phone. I love my android phone,
but I am simply not interested in spending additional money on applications,
and no matter how good app store search and discovery is and no matter how
painless payment is, I can't imagine any phone application I would be
interested in purchasing.

~~~
pohl
I think you're on to something, but I think "willingness to spend" might be
more accurate than "eager to spend".

I don't think it has anything to do with making a hobby out of phone use,
either. Plenty of android users are eager to tweak & tinker & install & play
around with their phones. They're just tight-fisted with their money, that's
all.

It seems to be a bit like linux users who — spoiled by the ability to freely
download and install something that will do almost anything — wouldn't think
to open their wallet to pay for software, no matter how good.

 _Edit: iOS isn't immune to this kind of user, either. Just check out app
reviews complaining about having to pay 1/5th what people would spend on
coffee for an app. But the existence of tightwads isn't as bad a problem as an
absence of paying customers. Android is like The Cheapskate Channel: all
tightwads, all the time._

~~~
roadnottaken
_"It seems to be a bit like linux users who — spoiled by the ability to freely
download and install something that will do almost anything — wouldn't think
to open their wallet to pay for software, no matter how good."_

I think this is not accurate. I recently purchased the 'Humble Indie Bundle 2'
games package which was available for all platforms. This was offered on a
'pay what you want' basis and, after deciding how much you would pay and
purchasing the games, they provided some very interesting data:

<http://i.imgur.com/Cn5vX.jpg>

In this case (maybe it's unusual?) Linux users were willing to (voluntarily)
fork out more cash for these games than either Windows or Mac users. Perhaps
it's because payment wasn't strictly necessary or something, I don't know. I
suspect that Linux users, as a community, are closer to the software-
development community, so when good software is made (without a bunch of
insulting DRM) at a reasonable price, they're more than happy to pay for it.

~~~
roel_v
"I suspect that Linux users, as a community, are closer to the software-
development community, so when good software is made (without a bunch of
insulting DRM) at a reasonable price, they're more than happy to pay for it."

Well the utter and complete non-existence of any commercial software on Linux
(yes I know about Oracle...), and the spectacular failure of anyone trying to
make any (who here remembers Corel's ill-faited WordPerfect for Linux attempt,
or Loki games?) are devastating proof that the exact opposite is true.

(I guess one could argue that 2$ is the 'reasonable price' for any and all
software, but that's just closing one's eyes to the economic realities of the
software industry).

I mean let's not beat around the bush: Linux users don't pay for software in
any sizable amount. Plunking down a few bucks for some games once every decade
doesn't count. I like Linux as much as the next guy and I've used it since
1998, but the extremists (at the FSF and elsewhere) that have managed to
somehow convince a large enough portion of Linux users that paying for
software is somehow a moral issue (I mean, seriously?) have killed 90% of the
market in that area. Yes I know that a few companies left and right make a few
cents on 'support' and other such frolicking in the margin, but Red Hat is the
only one who has managed to make any serious money from Linux itself (as
opposed to some others who have found a sound and cheap platform on it to
build their product offerings on, those seem to do OK with it)..

~~~
bryanlarsen
I see it as more like: Linux users will not pay for something when they're
forced to pay for something, but when they don't have to pay for something,
they're more likely to pay for it than other groups are. (Most still won't if
they don't have to, but some will, in a much higher percentage than users from
more mainstream OS's).

I think they're also much more likely to do without than to pirate. Of course,
it's easy for people to rationalize piracy in their head -- it has DRM, it's
too expensive, the company is evil, et cetera. But I think Linux users are
much more likely than other operating system users to do without rather than
pirate.

OTOH, OSX users are probably more likely to pay for things than do without.

I don't think the Android/iOS ecosystems have shaken out enough to make broad
generalizations yet.

Myself, I'm definitely a "Linux" style user. I've purchased a few Android
apps, but all of them have very usable free editions. Typically, all the paid
version does is remove the advertising. Removing advertising is not worth $5
to me, but I sometimes buy the premium version anyways.

~~~
roel_v
The cynic in me would say that Linux pirate less because there's nothing to
pirate >:) but I do agree with your overall assessment.

------
danteembermage
The marketplace is terrible for discovering new content. The absence of
anything like "top selling new apps this week" means scrolling through pages
and pages of the same old stuff.

~~~
scrrr
Not to mention the inability to browse on a desktop browser.

I'd like a feature where I surf on the web and select apps, and later that day
I press a "Sync" button of sorts and get the apps.

~~~
archivator
You just described appbrain.com Sure, it's not Google's baby but it's still a
hell of a lot better than the Market. It's been my go-to place for new apps
for a few months now.

~~~
pdaddyo
I still don't understand why Google haven't snapped up AppBrain and integrated
with their market. It is the superior solution at the moment.

------
apakatt
So first it took over a year for us in Sweden to get paid apps. Then it turns
out that there is some bug which prevents "google for my domain"-users from
buying Android-apps. Google Checkout with the same account works on a regular
computer but not on my phone even though all other features work.

So I have to create yet another GMail address and associate my credit card
with it just so I can buy apps which I've been to lazy to do.

Result: I've bought apps on my iPod touch which I never use but not once
single a Android app even though I've used Android since the launch of the
first dev-phone (2008).

------
ebaysucks
Funny how Google wants to implement a curator instead of the obvious solution:
an Android app search engine.

They tackle everything with algorithms, why not this problem?

~~~
scotu
as far as I can tell from the quotes, no curator is going to implemented, it
seams a simple speculation from appleinsider. I might be very wrong but to me
seems like a statement that google is strengthening his efforts started with
the market itself to kick out out-of-term-of-service apps. Not only malicious,
see apps like kongragate, that was considered an alternative android market
and so was pulled; it is no more in the market, this doesn't mean you cannot
install it your way, legally and easily.

The last two paragraphs are full of fud, BTW

------
mopoke
I'd happily buy Android apps if I could. Unfortunately in the country I live
in, paid apps aren't available.

~~~
thingie
What limitations are there now? I live in the Czech republic and I believed
that paid apps would not be available there, but in the last week, I was able
to buy anything I wanted, via google checkout, without any problems. Perhaps
I've missed something.

~~~
zrgiu
here you go:
[http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?hl...](http://www.google.com/support/androidmarket/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=138294)

don't believe the "we're working hard to add more..." bs at the bottom, that
list has been the unchanged for a long while now.

------
terhechte
Soon on Daring Fireball: Short quote from that article and a "Uh Oh" :)

------
lordmatty
I've a friend whose company released a decent quality branded App on the
Market recently. It was backed by a good amount of advertising/marketing and
was pitched at the correct demographic.

The total number of paid week one sales?

68

~~~
orangecat
Which comes out to 3500 per year. That's not bad, and is in the ballpark of
the median iOS app.

~~~
lordmatty
Thats week one with a big marketing push..we see at least that amount _per
day_ for our paid branded apps, and they have been around over a year and
receive no marketing spend.

I'm pretty sure the sales will drop off, like any iOS app.

------
warrenmiller
but don't forget Google makes a lot of cash from advertising on free apps.
They own Admob and Google Mobile Ads so have a good chunk of the Android
advertising market.

If an app gets purchased Google makes 30% of the sale, but with advertising
they make between 15-35% for the lifetime of the app.

Whats that worth? about a billion a year or so...
<http://www.mobilemarketer.com/cms/news/advertising/7772.html>

------
drtse4
"Google also hopes to negotiate carrier billing agreements with scores of
regional mobile providers, allowing users to buy apps and bill them to their
mobile account."

Hopes...? Implementing this (and extending the coverage of paied apps) will
completely change the market. No need to signup for any additional service and
to have a credit card (in Europe/rest of the world not as diffused as in the
US). If their objective is really to increase the sales, _this_ should be the
most important thing to do and that needs more people working on, not updating
the market site (although changes are needed).

------
gaiusparx
Sounds like an excuse for their lame marketplace which paid apps are not
available in many countries. They do not make it easy for developers of paid
apps. Why are they not happy? They are cornering app developers into free app+
advertising model (eg AngryBirds) and they should be very happy with the fat
AdMob dollars.

------
jacquesm
They've had their chance here, fancy Android phone, most frustrating
experience with a phone since trying out a Samsung about three years ago (I
hear they've since cleaned up their act).

Absolutely terrible battery life, most frustrating user interface I've ever
seen and a very rickety touch screen, next to impossible for me to type out a
message with any speed (fat fingers I guess).

I've passed it on to my s.o. who is pretty happy with it, I'm back to a very
cheap nokia. Buying an Iphone is not an option because I don't want to support
apple's mobile department as long as they're not going to drop their weird
app-store terms.

Never even got around to getting an android devkit before moving on.

~~~
andybak
I think you meant to reply on that 'generic smart phone whinges' thread.

------
bane
All I want, and it's not too hard, is to separate free from paid apps, then
apps from games, then be able to rank them by number of downloads or average
rating.

For search, AppBrain seems to have that pretty nailed down. (Actually the
AppBrain app is miles better than the crappy one from Google).

------
SoftwareMaven
I'm surprised nobody is talking about Google moving to a curated model. I'm
obviously comfortable with it, since I'm an iPhone owner; how do you Android
people feel about it? That was supposed to be a major differentiator between
the two marketplaces.

~~~
dminor
They aren't moving to a curated model, just beefing up the team that enforces
the Terms and Conditions. Probably overdue given the growth of the market.

------
mjangda
I would gladly buy apps if I had space on my phone. Thanks to the crippling
512mb on my Nexus One I get to spend every 3rd day cleaning my phone (despite
the fact that half my apps are already running off SD.)

------
stretchwithme
Google should give up and license others to run competing Android app stores.
Then someone will figure how to do international app sales and curate Android
apps.

~~~
db42
Even if google will not, someone(read amazon) is trying pretty hard :)
[http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/09/27/amazon-android-app-
stor...](http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/09/27/amazon-android-app-store/)

------
micubogdan
A google search algorithm would use to make some cleaning.On the internet,the
market is a free4all as well,but google search makes an order out of it.

------
zrgiu
Maybe someone from google is reading this: PLEASE ALLOW THE REST OF THE F*ING
WORLD TO SELL APPS.this is killing me here in Romania. I have 3 cool, good
looking games (angry birds competitors), just sitting and waiting.

~~~
fierarul
There is probably an opportunity cost because you aren't releasing the games
as soon as possible. You might consider entering into some sort of deal with
somebody that is able to publish your game or make an US (or whatever country
is allowed) entity.

Of course, this is much too complicated/expensive than it would be if Google
would do their part.

I'm also from Romania and this lack of support from Google is the reason I've
only done iOS apps.

~~~
zrgiu
i've explored that road actually, and it's not really possible. Besides having
a US/UK/[other allowed country] account, they also require you to have an
actual address in that country. There have been several developers who have
been publishing paid apps for other people and they got their accounts banned.

~~~
nextparadigms
Angry Birds is making $1 million a month from ads on Android. Have you tried
ads?

~~~
zrgiu
I'm actually in talks for a deal with an ad company. I think that's the way
it's going to be

------
nika
One thing that Apple has that Google doesn't seem to have is an affiliate
program. Affiliates get %5 of app sales (or other iTunes sales) by driving
traffic to the store. This provides a funding mechanism to incentivize people
to make discovery tools.

I'm kinda impressed with the number of third party discovery tools for
android, but I think that ecosystem would be more robust, and less of the
burden on google, if they provided a monetization method for good app
discovery.

Apple just partnered with LinkShare and other providers of the service. Seems
Google could do the same thing.

------
cormullion
OK for a beta release though

