Marketing’s Biggest Frustration: A Product That Sucks

This guest post by AppAgent founder Peter Fodor argues that mobile developers over-invest in marketing to compensate for weak products, and that no amount of acquisition optimization can rescue an app that fails to retain users. Published in January 2018 and aimed at mobile app and game marketers, it contends that product quality, especially retention, determines profitability far more than user acquisition efficiency.

Fodor cites Priori Data's finding that only 17% of apps in the post-iOS 11 Top 100 grossing chart were newcomers, attributing the stability of leaders to long-term optimization. He lists six reasons developers favor marketing over product work: overconfidence in a tired value proposition, misaligned product and marketing KPIs, weak analytics, the relative speed of marketing changes, the ability of one marketer to act alone versus multidisciplinary product teams, and ignorance of the "local maximum" limit on marketing gains.

The central illustration uses a game model with a fixed $0.30 average revenue per daily active user. A 30% reduction in cost per install lifts profit by 70%, while a 10% improvement in day-one retention lifts profit by 106%. Fodor adds that CPI is constrained by CPM, so a fivefold CPI reduction is unrealistic, whereas a tenfold LTV improvement is achievable.

A funnel graphic rates each stage's potential impact from 1 to 3, drawing on the firm's experience creating over 20 apps and marketing more than 50 apps and games. Citing Reforge's Brian Balfour, the post says retention drives virality and organic acquisition, improves monetization, builds a competitive edge by allowing higher acquisition bids, and shortens payback periods. The conclusion is that teams should fix the product first, focus on metrics with 10x to 100x upside, and begin a marketing push only once retention and conversion look promising.