Larissa Morimoto

Larissa explained that for PhotoRoom, they rented a huge LED screen so people could walk in, experiment with the photo booth, take pictures of themselves, edit their photos, and have their images blow up on the screen. The result was not primarily the foot traffic, but a lot of user-generated content.

Inside PhotoRoom’s “photo booth.”

That single activation reached 15,000 people in person and generated over 4 million impressions once the UGC was repurposed online.

What that can look like in practice:

• The more elaborate the experience, the fewer people you can typically reach, but the more memorable the experience becomes. When the experience is fun and novel, authentic user-generated content follows. This content can then be repurposed across paid ads, organic social, and other owned channels.

• Build the experience for shareable moments. Even if you’re not PhotoRoom, you can still make it photo-worthy. If you deliberately design for the aesthetic and the moment, users, their friends, and bystanders will want to take a picture, post it, or scan a QR code.

Below are two of the UGC videos that came out of the photo booth operation.

And what if you can find an offline placement so contextually precise that it functions like direct response and “meets” your target audience where they are? This Babbel ad in an in-flight magazine with a QR code and a contextual offer hit me on the way to a conference, but could also reach people going on vacations or business trips, who are trying to pick up a few words in another language. That’s a perfectly placed offline touchpoint. By showing a handful of useful phrases for the flight, the ad delivers a first-value moment before the reader even opens the app. And this one is perfectly measurable too!

Babbel ad in an in-flight magazine

This one from Larissa genuinely reframed something: the more tech-heavy your app, the more a human touch can differentiate it.

For me, the question behind any offline activity or event has always been: does this benefit the user and in what way? Rather than: how does this benefit the brand? When the answer to the first question is strong, the brand benefit usually follows.

That's why group runs were a natural fit at Runtastic. At Mimo, a large user base naturally translated into virtual community events, such as live online sessions, competitions, and challenges in the app. And at MyGroove, workshops and concerts were essential, as playing music together is the reason many people pick up an instrument.

That offline can change how people feel about a brand, not just remind them of it, is an underexplored angle. It’s worth distinguishing between the "community-native offline" (where events serve users first) vs. "brand-native offline" (where events serve the brand first) activations.

Here's a cautionary tale from Larissa's experience: “Japan is a large market for PhotoRoom. We secured a partnership with Tamiya (a well-known brand in the collectibles space) and hosted a community event at one of their recently opened offices to drive more foot traffic. We also brought in a local comedian to host the event. What we didn’t optimize for was actual foot traffic. And it showed.”

PhotoRoom’s event in Japan

Larissa adds: “If you’re going to try this strategy out, please, please, please, at least focus somewhat on your ICP or make it a very wide consumer event.”

Larissa adds that for brand campaigns, they track branded search uplift. They run brand awareness surveys and look at qualitative measures, rather than the traditional growth framework.

I find it useful to also look at:

• The uplift (or lack of it) vs the baseline. Branded web traffic and/or app downloads should show an immediate signal if the campaign had an impact.

• Whether offline activities moved brand perception or trust, e.g., conversion rates to trial or purchase, which typically happens in markets where trust is lacking.

• The shifts in the distribution of responses to the "How Did You Hear About Us” survey, with the share of respondents citing offline channels or word of mouth growing over time.

As Adam Hadi points out in the Mobile User Acquisition show:

This one shows up in more ways than just celebrity partnerships. A few other patterns I’ve seen often play out in day-to-day work:

1. Geographic and language mismatch. This one is often overlooked, especially when multiple teams are pitching influencers: what percentage of the creator’s audience is actually in your target markets? If your app isn’t localized into multiple languages, you risk burning impressions on an audience that can't convert.

2. Broad offline press and media. TV appearances or news coverage in a specific market can spike branded traffic and downloads. They rarely move the bottom line and should be treated primarily as brand-awareness plays that can increase trust and credibility in the long term and thus help convert users.

3. The credibility argument. I know of several apps that genuinely struggle to grow in more traditional markets like DACH. Not because their product isn’t good, but because those markets are later adopters, and a sustained presence helps. So, if you’re operating in markets where trust is harder to earn, the credibility argument for influencer and celebrity partnerships gets stronger.

Larissa rightfully points out that the problem of diminishing returns from paid channels intensifies as spend increases.

One thing also worth mentioning is the underappreciated relationship between the scale of paid user acquisition and the top-of-mind awareness. The former builds the latter, often invisibly but compounding over time.

For Current, Adam Hadi (VP of Marketing at Current) started with digital channels first. At the same time, a major European fintech app launched in the US with a huge out-of-home splash: billboards, bus stations, etc. It did not move the needle on app downloads.