Free trial vs. IAP

[Manfred Pohler]

Hi,

I come from the iPhone side when it's about mobile development.
There (some years ago) it was typical to provide two apps "Super XX free" and "Super XX" - or "Super XX" and "Super XX pro".
Anyhow - one app was free and you could update to the paid version.

Nowadays it's (if I'm not wrong) there are other models.

From my point of view I have two possibilities.
Provide a paid app with trial.
Or provide a free app with IAP.

In both cases paying will result in "more functionallity" or "no adds" or something like this.

To be a bit more specific.
a.) I don't like adds - and from what I hear they don't bring much revenue
b.) My app has three potential customers (users).
b1.) The ones doing little
b2.) The ones doing a bit more
b3.) The reals pros (doing a lot)

So for b1 I provide a "light" version and for the others a "pro" version.
b2 can still work with "light" - but it isn't so feature rich (in some place a bit more complicated) to use it for b2-needs
b3 definitely knows that he needs pro - he can check with light but will switch (if he likes the app) for sure

To be a bit more precise with the "two apps" I want to explain my expectations.
Users of the free version should build a base - and make the app popular.
The paid version shell bring money.

And a last word (why I don't even think about two different apps).
The app collects data (users enter data) which is important for users.
So when they want to upgrade they shall keep all their things.
Or in other words - go on using the same app with enhance functionallity.

I published my app as paid with trial.
Asking a number of colleagues what they think about it and the response was (mostly) they wouldn't take a closer look since it costs money.

So I'm thinking about the IAP solution. Although it looks a bit more complicated (just had a short look on the workflow) but the "first impression" of a free app seems much better.

Has someone experiences with the two models?
What works better?

 

[nosaj_j]

Hey Manfred

Users on the platform act and expect slightly different things than their ios counterparts. Very few apps in the store are released as a fully paid version off the bat. The users kind of expect to receive the value first before they are prepared to pay more for the experience. paid apps even with free trials kind of go against that mindset.

So IAP is a good option for your circumstances and it doesn't have to mean that you use ads as part of the process. You may choose to hide certain functionality or features behind a paywall which can be unlocked as and when the user is comfortable with that the function as value to them.

Once you have built a following you may then choose to release a premium version or a 2.0 with 'next generation' features your existing user base is more likely to opt for the upgrade as they have trust in the product and newer users will be drawn based on the positive feedback from your original user Base.

I hope this helps!!

Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

 

[Manfred Pohler]

Thank you for your detailed information - helped me a lot!!

 

[mbrdev]

I agree that IAP seems to be the way to go at the moment (speaking as a developer), however, speaking as a user I much prefer the free trail model. When apps use IAP for features it always gives me the impression that further features and updates later on will require further IAPs which puts me off a bit, with the free trial model I can see if the app meets my needs and then pay for it if I like it, then I feel like I have support for all future updates. Its a tricky mindset to work around as some people will always prefer IAP and others will always prefer free trials. To me an IAP should be for a consumable product or subscription fees, and purchasing the app itself is for buying a license to use the app indefinitely.

Saying all that though, right now IAP provides more revenue compared to free trials in most cases. This might not always be the case, so it's best to keep track of the market trends over time.

Good luck!

 

[RoboLam]

Another developer chiming in, completely agree with mbrdev and nosaj_j. IAP seems to get a much better response than free trial (even without timelimit). I also agree with mbrdev that my my personal user experience is that i like free trials because IAP feels kind of like extortion? Lots of apps have very arbitrary IAPs.

I think the key to IAP success is having a good natural place to divide your app between free and paid features. If it feels contrived or you're having a hard time making it "feel right" then maybe just go with free trial. That's my 2cents anyway. Best of luck whichever decision you make (or have already made).

 

[sinime]

Free with IAP is the way to go... People seem to not download paid apps with free trials for some reason, although it's about the same in the end.

 

[RoboLam]

Free with IAP is the way to go... People seem to not download paid apps with free trials for some reason, although it's about the same in the end.

It's like they say, "a person is smart, people are dumb" but it's a battle not worth fighting...just go with the flow...

 

[OrangeSpice]

Releasing two different versions of the same app is not recommended for the simple reason that separate versions will dilute you ratings and rankings and can cause confusion for your users.

Windows Phone users are also known to spend less than their IOS counterparts - so pricing IAP effectively is also critical to your apps success.

I would consider offering a free version with 2 different Durable IAP`s at different price points - that unlock the premium features.
Remember to provide clear value around those items so that users feel compelled to purchase them.