4 ms·

This article is a mess. Traction (esp. on mobile) has been hard for a long, long time; it's absolutely not a new problem in 2017. Why? The competition to get

This article is a mess. Traction (esp. on mobile) has been hard for a long, long time; it's absolutely not a new problem in 2017. Why? The competition to get and keep user attention is BRUTAL. On one side, we've got large, entrenched players (FB, Google, etc.). And when something catches their eye, they pull it into their platform (FB vs Foursquare, FB vs Snap, Apple vs Instapaper, etc.). This puts a soft upper-bound on certain kinds of mobile ideas. On the other side, we've got an amazingly efficient ecosystem for anyone with a $200 laptop, a free Wifi connection, and talent to build the next great app. To the first order: hosting, tools, etc are all free -- there are effectively no barriers to entry. On the article's content, some of the charts are 5-10+yrs old, which is forever in Internet terms. It also says, "Paying for acquisition is one of the key channels still available" -- for very large national or global brands...maybe..? But if you are a startup or midsized mobile app company and your plan is to pay for customers, you need a new plan.

increment_i 9y ago
>> "there are effectively no barriers to entry." IMO, this will work against you in the long run. I suppose it allows you to test out ideas easily. Profit will be very hard to come by though.
- exelius 9y ago
  Well, no barriers to entry basically means it's a commodity market and that consolidation/scale is the key to competitive advantage.
IsaacL 9y ago
Next to the old charts you mention, the author writes: "This is just the 2017 version of The Law of Shitty Clickthroughs, which I wrote about a few years ago, where I showed some stats indicating that email marketing open rates are on the decline … and that traditional banner CTRs seem to be asymptotically approaching zero". I.e., he indicates that this is a continuation of long-running trend, and that those particular charts illustrate the trend from several years ago, so your criticism misses the mark. I thought it was a very interesting article, and identifies a set of fundamental trends. The main weakness is too much focus on B2C, but that's the author's area of interest.
coldtea 9y ago
>Traction (esp. on mobile) has been hard for a long, long time; it's absolutely not a new problem in 2017. Why? The competition to get and keep user attention is BRUTAL. That doesn't make the article "a mess", just because it doesn't delve into a particular pain point of one aspect of what it discusses -- that's classic "first HN comment" hyperbole. The article offers a much broader view, and goes into discussing trends, similar patterns in history, for several aspects way beyond "mobile traction". Which is also why "some of the charts are 5 years old". Because the cycle the article refers to is not some short-term trend, but an overall assessment of where things were and are going.
- payne92 9y ago
  ..but a chart that is five years old and a fast-moving space like the Internet: difficult to argue patterns, since the patterns may have changed dramatically since the chart was made!

increment_i 9y ago

>> "there are effectively no barriers to entry." IMO, this will work against you in the long run. I suppose it allows you to test out ideas easily. Profit will be very hard to come by though.

exelius 9y ago
Well, no barriers to entry basically means it's a commodity market and that consolidation/scale is the key to competitive advantage.

IsaacL 9y ago

Next to the old charts you mention, the author writes: "This is just the 2017 version of The Law of Shitty Clickthroughs, which I wrote about a few years ago, where I showed some stats indicating that email marketing open rates are on the decline … and that traditional banner CTRs seem to be asymptotically approaching zero". I.e., he indicates that this is a continuation of long-running trend, and that those particular charts illustrate the trend from several years ago, so your criticism misses the mark. I thought it was a very interesting article, and identifies a set of fundamental trends. The main weakness is too much focus on B2C, but that's the author's area of interest.

coldtea 9y ago

>Traction (esp. on mobile) has been hard for a long, long time; it's absolutely not a new problem in 2017. Why? The competition to get and keep user attention is BRUTAL. That doesn't make the article "a mess", just because it doesn't delve into a particular pain point of one aspect of what it discusses -- that's classic "first HN comment" hyperbole. The article offers a much broader view, and goes into discussing trends, similar patterns in history, for several aspects way beyond "mobile traction". Which is also why "some of the charts are 5 years old". Because the cycle the article refers to is not some short-term trend, but an overall assessment of where things were and are going.

payne92 9y ago
..but a chart that is five years old and a fast-moving space like the Internet: difficult to argue patterns, since the patterns may have changed dramatically since the chart was made!