Report shows in-app purchases to be most lucrative# MobileDevelopment - 移动开发
z*n
1 楼
Have you noticed the rise in applications making use of in-app purchases? A
new report from VentureBeat Intel shows these developers have good reason to
implement them; after all, they are by far the most lucrative method of
monetisation.
The report collates data taken from 176 various developers across 1,000
different games to get a clear idea of how others can profit from their
works.
It takes into account the cost-effectiveness of implementing the various
methods alongside its popularity. Certain monetisation methods are less
popular but also effective. These include; text walls, app walls, in-app
promotion of other apps, and offer walls (the option to accept an offer
which generates revenue for the developer.)
Paying for a download upfront is now among the least popular and less cost-
effective form of monetisation. This isn’t surprising since the free-to-
play model now accounts for 81 percent of revenue on Apple’s US App Store,
and even more internationally.
More traditional advertising methods such as banner and video ads are still
both popular and cost-effective for the effort. Despite this, further
results show the smallest amount of revenue gained from these strategies…
Banners ads and traditional static images bring in the least revenue, whilst
notification ads and real-world rewards bring in more. Of course smaller
developers don’t always have the clout to offer real-world rewards.
In the same way, this could be the reason Google was selected as the top
monetisation platform. It’s probable to be the default option used by small
developers who don’t have the time to use other potentially better
solutions.
The report argues: "Small developers are cheating themselves by not using
multiple monetization strategies from the top companies who are winning
larger shares of ad revenue per user.”
new report from VentureBeat Intel shows these developers have good reason to
implement them; after all, they are by far the most lucrative method of
monetisation.
The report collates data taken from 176 various developers across 1,000
different games to get a clear idea of how others can profit from their
works.
It takes into account the cost-effectiveness of implementing the various
methods alongside its popularity. Certain monetisation methods are less
popular but also effective. These include; text walls, app walls, in-app
promotion of other apps, and offer walls (the option to accept an offer
which generates revenue for the developer.)
Paying for a download upfront is now among the least popular and less cost-
effective form of monetisation. This isn’t surprising since the free-to-
play model now accounts for 81 percent of revenue on Apple’s US App Store,
and even more internationally.
More traditional advertising methods such as banner and video ads are still
both popular and cost-effective for the effort. Despite this, further
results show the smallest amount of revenue gained from these strategies…
Banners ads and traditional static images bring in the least revenue, whilst
notification ads and real-world rewards bring in more. Of course smaller
developers don’t always have the clout to offer real-world rewards.
In the same way, this could be the reason Google was selected as the top
monetisation platform. It’s probable to be the default option used by small
developers who don’t have the time to use other potentially better
solutions.
The report argues: "Small developers are cheating themselves by not using
multiple monetization strategies from the top companies who are winning
larger shares of ad revenue per user.”