Before getting any app off the ground, it helps to have the ideal mobile app monetization strategy selected right from the get-go. That way, app revenue is well ingrained in the user experience.
But, how do you determine how to monetize your app? Each app monetization model has its own pros and cons. What works for one app could be totally wrong and misguided for another one.
So, among the various app monetization strategies out there, how do you decide what will be best for your app? After all, you’d likely rather focus on mobile app development, not app revenue.
To help, we’ve compiled this handy guide to walk you through the pluses and minuses of the most common options out there.
This is one of the most common - and most lucrative - mobile app monetization options available. Yes, we may be a little biased here, but the data backs us up. Non-gaming apps earn 76 percent of their revenue from native ads, banner ads and video, while gaming apps get 53 percent of their revenue from advertising.
In comparison to other options, in-app advertising offers a few key advantages:
But, it’s not without its drawbacks. Most people (i.e. your user base) are not fans of ads of any kind, and it can negatively impact an app’s usability if implemented poorly. Plus, between issues related to tracking, data usage/sharing and brand safety, not all brands are yet totally convinced of its merit.
With a freemium app, most of the app’s functionality is totally free to use, and likely the app itself is free to download as well. But, in order to unlock additional elements or features, in-app purchases are required.
It can be lucrative for many apps, with freemium games in particular making over $24 a month per user on average. This helps to make freemium model quite popular in games. Over 43 percent of all gaming apps earn revenue through mobile commerce and in-app purchases.
In this kind of environment, it’s easy to see why someone may want to pay extra for a special weapon or a unique costume. Apps that don’t lend themselves well to in-app advertising, like apps that target children or apps where ads would negatively affect the user experience, can benefit from the freemium model.
The downside to the freemium model is that the app needs to have enough in the free version to entice end users, but also be able to offer more so that someone is willing to pay. Utility apps, like a weather app, are often not good candidates for the freemium model for this reason. And, in order to make money as a freemium app, the app needs to have sufficient reach plus sticky users to entice enough people towards the premium version (or added features).
This model is fairly straightforward: someone pays to download the app. The benefit here is that you earn money upfront for user access to the app, meaning lifetime value and user retention have less of an impact on the bottom line. Games, especially those from big-name publishers, will utilize this model, as will premium utility apps like high-end fitness trackers and business-centric apps.
Of course, an app needs to provide significant value to someone to compel them to spend money on it. A dollar isn’t much, but with so many free apps out there, it can be hard to get someone to fork over their money. And, app revenues can only scale in direct linear correlation to new app downloads. These reasons tend to make paid downloads a less popular option, which is why most of the world’s top apps are free to download.
Under this model, users are asked to pay a recurring fee either for use of the app in its entirety or for particular features. Magazines and news publications have long operated under a similar model, which is why it’s popular with the likes of The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. Apps that work well with the freemium model and the paid download model can make subscriptions work too, as a similar pay-to-play functionality is being offered.
The subscription model is beneficial since, unlike with one-time app or feature purchases, it allows publishers to generate recurring revenue. But, because it’s more expensive, people may be even less likely to fork over their money than they would be with a standard freemium app or a paid app.
This isn’t an official name, but it’s one way to describe apps that facilitate a purchase or another transaction even though they’re typically free to download, don’t feature ads or have in-app purchases. Ridesharing apps like Lyft are a good example, as are banking apps. Just about all of the apps behind the growing gig economy fall under this umbrella.
This can be a tempting model to follow. After all, it combines the low barrier of entry of ad-supported apps with the user experience of a paid app. What’s not to love?
But - and there’s always a but - it still must provide enough value to a user to keep them around and paying. Apps like Uber and Bird need a lot of upfront funding to get off the ground, while apps like Wingz never quite cracked through to profitability. It can be a long journey to generate sufficient revenue for many of these apps, and they often require either a successful business or another source of outside funding to get off the ground and keep functioning.
We’ve presented each of these models as an either/or proposition, but that’s not necessarily the case in real life. Many apps will utilize a combination of options. After all, a pay-to-download app could still have a subscription feature, while another app could feature both ads and in-app purchases. A combination can help an app generate additional revenue, but having too many ways to make money in one app can be off-putting to users.
Of course, these are not the only options out there. Some apps, like Angry Birds, make money through merchandising, while others are made and distributed without any regard for app revenue.
What model do you use with your app? Let us in the comments!