Govind Balakrishnan (CEO of Curio Labs - Curated Audio Journalism) is interviewed by Shamanth Rao (CEO of RocketShip HQ - Mobile Growth Consultancy) about design changes to increase engagement, working with Apple, onboarding, activation and revenue.
If you can get people really using your product, you don’t need to talk about it. Especially if these people include Apple employees.
When making product decisions, go back to the “jobs” you’re trying to get done and why people come to you. Example for Curio: 1. Understanding the world 2. Self-improvement and inspiration 3. Smart escape
For a content app you have to constantly experiment on how much content choice you’re giving. You’re actually trying to aim at a moving target because people cycle through their moods and motivations.
When they tried to delay the subscription pop-up to after users experience all of the product instead of after you sign up, their conversions fell by 40%. It was more preferable to be up-front with people.
There’s a relationship between someone who builds a habit to the product and becomes a subscriber. But people are also willing to take a chance on a product, especially if they come from a good acquisition channel. A lot of people are willing to subscribe first then try it up.
For products around inspiration and self-development like Curio, people project a future version of themselves. This translates into some people being comfortable projecting this future self, subscribing and building the habit later.
Curio removed sign up, because they were asking for information without giving anything in return. Instead they became very up front about the fact that it was a paid product (first screen is the paywall), yet allowing users to experience the product without giving any information in return. Generous, but honest and upfront.
There is the obvious form of hard activation (e.g. listening to a track), but there might be other signals as well that you can find through a more sophisticated data infrastructure. You can even find the signals that lead to a higher LTV.
Activation and revenue might not be in conflict, but they need to be thought of differently. The mindset between people coming in can be very different. Example: someone who wants to build the habit first then subscribe vs. someone who projects the future version of themselves, takes a chance on the product and subscribes directly.
When thinking about price testing, keep in mind that people are more interested in getting value than they are sensitive to price. There is actually a point where there is an inverse correlation (conversions falling when reducing price).
When testing out the best features to make available for free, also think about the context in which users first hear about your product. Example: maybe tracks are not the most valuable to give for free (vs. saving for later) in the case where someone tells you about Curio while you’re watching Netflix.
If you can get people really using your product, you don’t need to talk about it. Especially if these people include Apple employees.
When making product decisions, go back to the “jobs” you’re trying to get done and why people come to you. Example for Curio: 1. Understanding the world 2. Self-improvement and inspiration 3. Smart escape
For a content app you have to constantly experiment on how much content choice you’re giving. You’re actually trying to aim at a moving target because people cycle through their moods and motivations.
When they tried to delay the subscription pop-up to after users experience all of the product instead of after you sign up, their conversions fell by 40%. It was more preferable to be up-front with people.
There’s a relationship between someone who builds a habit to the product and becomes a subscriber. But people are also willing to take a chance on a product, especially if they come from a good acquisition channel. A lot of people are willing to subscribe first then try it up.
For products around inspiration and self-development like Curio, people project a future version of themselves. This translates into some people being comfortable projecting this future self, subscribing and building the habit later.
Curio removed sign up, because they were asking for information without giving anything in return. Instead they became very up front about the fact that it was a paid product (first screen is the paywall), yet allowing users to experience the product without giving any information in return. Generous, but honest and upfront.
There is the obvious form of hard activation (e.g. listening to a track), but there might be other signals as well that you can find through a more sophisticated data infrastructure. You can even find the signals that lead to a higher LTV.
Activation and revenue might not be in conflict, but they need to be thought of differently. The mindset between people coming in can be very different. Example: someone who wants to build the habit first then subscribe vs. someone who projects the future version of themselves, takes a chance on the product and subscribes directly.
When thinking about price testing, keep in mind that people are more interested in getting value than they are sensitive to price. There is actually a point where there is an inverse correlation (conversions falling when reducing price).
When testing out the best features to make available for free, also think about the context in which users first hear about your product. Example: maybe tracks are not the most valuable to give for free (vs. saving for later) in the case where someone tells you about Curio while you’re watching Netflix.
If you can get people really using your product, you don’t need to talk about it. Especially if these people include Apple employees.
When making product decisions, go back to the “jobs” you’re trying to get done and why people come to you. Example for Curio: 1. Understanding the world 2. Self-improvement and inspiration 3. Smart escape
For a content app you have to constantly experiment on how much content choice you’re giving. You’re actually trying to aim at a moving target because people cycle through their moods and motivations.
When they tried to delay the subscription pop-up to after users experience all of the product instead of after you sign up, their conversions fell by 40%. It was more preferable to be up-front with people.
There’s a relationship between someone who builds a habit to the product and becomes a subscriber. But people are also willing to take a chance on a product, especially if they come from a good acquisition channel. A lot of people are willing to subscribe first then try it up.
For products around inspiration and self-development like Curio, people project a future version of themselves. This translates into some people being comfortable projecting this future self, subscribing and building the habit later.
Curio removed sign up, because they were asking for information without giving anything in return. Instead they became very up front about the fact that it was a paid product (first screen is the paywall), yet allowing users to experience the product without giving any information in return. Generous, but honest and upfront.
There is the obvious form of hard activation (e.g. listening to a track), but there might be other signals as well that you can find through a more sophisticated data infrastructure. You can even find the signals that lead to a higher LTV.
Activation and revenue might not be in conflict, but they need to be thought of differently. The mindset between people coming in can be very different. Example: someone who wants to build the habit first then subscribe vs. someone who projects the future version of themselves, takes a chance on the product and subscribes directly.
When thinking about price testing, keep in mind that people are more interested in getting value than they are sensitive to price. There is actually a point where there is an inverse correlation (conversions falling when reducing price).
When testing out the best features to make available for free, also think about the context in which users first hear about your product. Example: maybe tracks are not the most valuable to give for free (vs. saving for later) in the case where someone tells you about Curio while you’re watching Netflix.
Notes for this resource are currently being transferred and will be available soon.
At the time, Govind heard things like “Nobody's going to listen to audio. Even the biggest publishers in the world have only a couple of minutes per session per day on their websites. With audio being sequential and immersive, it’s going to be very hard to build anything engaging in the space”.
One of the big hypotheses for Curio was that audio is the future, not the past. They felt strongly that the visual medium was optimized for short attention spans and that there was a need for a more meaningful consumption.
Nobody thought people would pay for audio because there are so many free podcasts. Their hypothesis there was that people would pay for convenience, quality and curation. It turns out that 60% of their users are not podcast listeners.
There is a huge demand for self-development and inspiration. Really good, thoughtful journalism (not daily news), is a real engine to convert to self-development and inspiration.
People multitask for many hours a day. When building the product, one of Curio’s inspirations was a quote from Apple: “People who are really serious about software should make their own software”.
“Those that are serious about content create their own experiences”
For Curio that was “Those that are serious about content create their own experiences” and so they thrived for the following:
They worked closely with Apple and one of the things Apple really fed into them is creating “occasions” and owning them. So, when they worked with them on the widget, they really built “occasions” for people.
Initially they were wondering why publishers would speak to them, why Apple would speak to them, etc.
Curio wants to build empathy in the world through wonder, and translating journalism into opportunities for self development and improvement is the way we did that. It’s their North Star.
Everyone was actually a user of their product (even Apple) and getting value for it.
[💎@08:50] If you can get people really using your product, you don’t need to talk about it. Especially if these people include Apple employees.
Regarding curation, Curio went back to the “job” they’re trying to get done. Publishers have a lot of great content but Curio filters with:
[💎@09:59] When making product decisions, go back to the “jobs” you’re trying to get done and why people come to you. Example for Curio: 1. Understanding the world 2. Self-improvement and inspiration 3.Smart escape
Even today the app is very geared towards early adopters. Initially they would even dial down the amount of content available. Now they’re going to dial it up.
[💎@11:38] For a content app you have to constantly experiment on how much content choice you’re giving. You’re actually trying to aim at a moving target because people cycle through their moods and motivations.
Early on they had a traditional flow: you’d sign up to the app then get the subscription pop-up.
[💎@12:26] When they tried to delay the subscription pop-up to after users experience all of the product instead of after you sign up, their conversions fell by 40%. It was more preferable to be up-front with people.
They also tried to remove the terms & conditions and their conversions fell. People want to know what they’re signing up for.
[💎@13:24] There’s a relationship between someone who builds a habit to the product and becomes a subscriber. But people are also willing to take a chance on a product, especially if they come from a good acquisition channel. A lot of people are willing to subscribe first then try it up.
[💎@14:05] For products around inspiration and self-development like Curio, people project a future version of themselves. This translates into some people being comfortable projecting this future self, subscribing and building the habit later.
Early on: sign up -> subscribe (with possibility to get a free tier).
“There’s no point in taking people to a garden and not letting them walk on the lawn.”
[💎@15:40] Curio removed sign up, because they were asking for information without giving anything in return. Instead they became very up front about the fact that it was a paid product (first screen is the paywall), yet allowing users to experience the product without giving any information in return. Generous, but honest and upfront.
Then adding time shift (“save for later”) was really the pathway to conviction-building.
They think a lot about activation in terms of both the signals and the point of activating users.
They found out that everyone who listens to 5-6 tracks on Curio has a 95% likelihood of listening to 7-8 tracks. Once the product has formed the habit there is a velocity.
Early on for YouTube, the activation was getting people to start watching a video. But then subscribing to a channel became a softer, easier activation.
[💎@18:30] There is the obvious form of hard activation (e.g. listening to a track), but there might be other signals as well that you can find through a more sophisticated data infrastructure. You can even find the signals that lead to a higher LTV.
[💎@19:10] Activation and revenue might not be in conflict, but they need to be thought of differently. The mindset between people coming in can be very different. Example: someone who wants to build the habit first then subscribe vs. someone who projects the future version of themselves, takes a chance on the product and subscribes directly.
This is true for a lot of subscription businesses. Example for a big publication: someone who comes to look at the news then goes away can be less or more valuable than someone who looks at the news then looks at another section. Time spent might not be the right signal.
There can be 2 pathways, 2 “user jobs”.
The question is not one of price but one of value.
[💎@20:53] When thinking about price testing, keep in mind that people are more interested in getting value than they are sensitive to price. There is actually a point where there is an inverse correlation (conversions falling when reducing price).
They initially started with 10 free tracks, mirroring what big publications do with 10 free articles and because their hard activation point was 5-6 tracks.
But they are actually thinking about what really are the best free features to make available. Example: is this listening to a track, adding to a queue or time shifting (saving it)?
[💎@21:38] When testing out the best features to make available for free, also think about the context in which users first hear about your product. Example: maybe tracks are not the most valuable to give for free (vs. saving for later) in the case where someone tells you about Curio while you’re watching Netflix.
In a way, Curio is a marketplace between content creators and users.
The biggest subscription businesses in the world are, on some level, content businesses.
For Curio, the opportunity to partner with other entities that are in the same space is invaluable. Co-productions happen all the time in the TV business.
In terms of curating the content, they think across 3 dimensions:
On top of that, they overlay a production model where they are co-producing content: original programming, directly with creators, etc. in order to create a rich tapestry of high-quality content sourcing.
Curio aims at giving people a way to access the widest breadth of content but the richest set of content, and for as many people as possible.
With publishers there is a win-win model because they care about reaching audiences, engagement and new revenue streams. And it’s hard for an organization like BBC to pivot to the kind of product they have. Partners have seen the opportunity and they grabbed it.
Curio complements what publishers do.
At the time, Govind heard things like “Nobody's going to listen to audio. Even the biggest publishers in the world have only a couple of minutes per session per day on their websites. With audio being sequential and immersive, it’s going to be very hard to build anything engaging in the space”.
One of the big hypotheses for Curio was that audio is the future, not the past. They felt strongly that the visual medium was optimized for short attention spans and that there was a need for a more meaningful consumption.
Nobody thought people would pay for audio because there are so many free podcasts. Their hypothesis there was that people would pay for convenience, quality and curation. It turns out that 60% of their users are not podcast listeners.
There is a huge demand for self-development and inspiration. Really good, thoughtful journalism (not daily news), is a real engine to convert to self-development and inspiration.
People multitask for many hours a day. When building the product, one of Curio’s inspirations was a quote from Apple: “People who are really serious about software should make their own software”.
“Those that are serious about content create their own experiences”
For Curio that was “Those that are serious about content create their own experiences” and so they thrived for the following:
They worked closely with Apple and one of the things Apple really fed into them is creating “occasions” and owning them. So, when they worked with them on the widget, they really built “occasions” for people.
Initially they were wondering why publishers would speak to them, why Apple would speak to them, etc.
Curio wants to build empathy in the world through wonder, and translating journalism into opportunities for self development and improvement is the way we did that. It’s their North Star.
Everyone was actually a user of their product (even Apple) and getting value for it.
[💎@08:50] If you can get people really using your product, you don’t need to talk about it. Especially if these people include Apple employees.
Regarding curation, Curio went back to the “job” they’re trying to get done. Publishers have a lot of great content but Curio filters with:
[💎@09:59] When making product decisions, go back to the “jobs” you’re trying to get done and why people come to you. Example for Curio: 1. Understanding the world 2. Self-improvement and inspiration 3.Smart escape
Even today the app is very geared towards early adopters. Initially they would even dial down the amount of content available. Now they’re going to dial it up.
[💎@11:38] For a content app you have to constantly experiment on how much content choice you’re giving. You’re actually trying to aim at a moving target because people cycle through their moods and motivations.
Early on they had a traditional flow: you’d sign up to the app then get the subscription pop-up.
[💎@12:26] When they tried to delay the subscription pop-up to after users experience all of the product instead of after you sign up, their conversions fell by 40%. It was more preferable to be up-front with people.
They also tried to remove the terms & conditions and their conversions fell. People want to know what they’re signing up for.
[💎@13:24] There’s a relationship between someone who builds a habit to the product and becomes a subscriber. But people are also willing to take a chance on a product, especially if they come from a good acquisition channel. A lot of people are willing to subscribe first then try it up.
[💎@14:05] For products around inspiration and self-development like Curio, people project a future version of themselves. This translates into some people being comfortable projecting this future self, subscribing and building the habit later.
Early on: sign up -> subscribe (with possibility to get a free tier).
“There’s no point in taking people to a garden and not letting them walk on the lawn.”
[💎@15:40] Curio removed sign up, because they were asking for information without giving anything in return. Instead they became very up front about the fact that it was a paid product (first screen is the paywall), yet allowing users to experience the product without giving any information in return. Generous, but honest and upfront.
Then adding time shift (“save for later”) was really the pathway to conviction-building.
They think a lot about activation in terms of both the signals and the point of activating users.
They found out that everyone who listens to 5-6 tracks on Curio has a 95% likelihood of listening to 7-8 tracks. Once the product has formed the habit there is a velocity.
Early on for YouTube, the activation was getting people to start watching a video. But then subscribing to a channel became a softer, easier activation.
[💎@18:30] There is the obvious form of hard activation (e.g. listening to a track), but there might be other signals as well that you can find through a more sophisticated data infrastructure. You can even find the signals that lead to a higher LTV.
[💎@19:10] Activation and revenue might not be in conflict, but they need to be thought of differently. The mindset between people coming in can be very different. Example: someone who wants to build the habit first then subscribe vs. someone who projects the future version of themselves, takes a chance on the product and subscribes directly.
This is true for a lot of subscription businesses. Example for a big publication: someone who comes to look at the news then goes away can be less or more valuable than someone who looks at the news then looks at another section. Time spent might not be the right signal.
There can be 2 pathways, 2 “user jobs”.
The question is not one of price but one of value.
[💎@20:53] When thinking about price testing, keep in mind that people are more interested in getting value than they are sensitive to price. There is actually a point where there is an inverse correlation (conversions falling when reducing price).
They initially started with 10 free tracks, mirroring what big publications do with 10 free articles and because their hard activation point was 5-6 tracks.
But they are actually thinking about what really are the best free features to make available. Example: is this listening to a track, adding to a queue or time shifting (saving it)?
[💎@21:38] When testing out the best features to make available for free, also think about the context in which users first hear about your product. Example: maybe tracks are not the most valuable to give for free (vs. saving for later) in the case where someone tells you about Curio while you’re watching Netflix.
In a way, Curio is a marketplace between content creators and users.
The biggest subscription businesses in the world are, on some level, content businesses.
For Curio, the opportunity to partner with other entities that are in the same space is invaluable. Co-productions happen all the time in the TV business.
In terms of curating the content, they think across 3 dimensions:
On top of that, they overlay a production model where they are co-producing content: original programming, directly with creators, etc. in order to create a rich tapestry of high-quality content sourcing.
Curio aims at giving people a way to access the widest breadth of content but the richest set of content, and for as many people as possible.
With publishers there is a win-win model because they care about reaching audiences, engagement and new revenue streams. And it’s hard for an organization like BBC to pivot to the kind of product they have. Partners have seen the opportunity and they grabbed it.
Curio complements what publishers do.
At the time, Govind heard things like “Nobody's going to listen to audio. Even the biggest publishers in the world have only a couple of minutes per session per day on their websites. With audio being sequential and immersive, it’s going to be very hard to build anything engaging in the space”.
One of the big hypotheses for Curio was that audio is the future, not the past. They felt strongly that the visual medium was optimized for short attention spans and that there was a need for a more meaningful consumption.
Nobody thought people would pay for audio because there are so many free podcasts. Their hypothesis there was that people would pay for convenience, quality and curation. It turns out that 60% of their users are not podcast listeners.
There is a huge demand for self-development and inspiration. Really good, thoughtful journalism (not daily news), is a real engine to convert to self-development and inspiration.
People multitask for many hours a day. When building the product, one of Curio’s inspirations was a quote from Apple: “People who are really serious about software should make their own software”.
“Those that are serious about content create their own experiences”
For Curio that was “Those that are serious about content create their own experiences” and so they thrived for the following:
They worked closely with Apple and one of the things Apple really fed into them is creating “occasions” and owning them. So, when they worked with them on the widget, they really built “occasions” for people.
Initially they were wondering why publishers would speak to them, why Apple would speak to them, etc.
Curio wants to build empathy in the world through wonder, and translating journalism into opportunities for self development and improvement is the way we did that. It’s their North Star.
Everyone was actually a user of their product (even Apple) and getting value for it.
[💎@08:50] If you can get people really using your product, you don’t need to talk about it. Especially if these people include Apple employees.
Regarding curation, Curio went back to the “job” they’re trying to get done. Publishers have a lot of great content but Curio filters with:
[💎@09:59] When making product decisions, go back to the “jobs” you’re trying to get done and why people come to you. Example for Curio: 1. Understanding the world 2. Self-improvement and inspiration 3.Smart escape
Even today the app is very geared towards early adopters. Initially they would even dial down the amount of content available. Now they’re going to dial it up.
[💎@11:38] For a content app you have to constantly experiment on how much content choice you’re giving. You’re actually trying to aim at a moving target because people cycle through their moods and motivations.
Early on they had a traditional flow: you’d sign up to the app then get the subscription pop-up.
[💎@12:26] When they tried to delay the subscription pop-up to after users experience all of the product instead of after you sign up, their conversions fell by 40%. It was more preferable to be up-front with people.
They also tried to remove the terms & conditions and their conversions fell. People want to know what they’re signing up for.
[💎@13:24] There’s a relationship between someone who builds a habit to the product and becomes a subscriber. But people are also willing to take a chance on a product, especially if they come from a good acquisition channel. A lot of people are willing to subscribe first then try it up.
[💎@14:05] For products around inspiration and self-development like Curio, people project a future version of themselves. This translates into some people being comfortable projecting this future self, subscribing and building the habit later.
Early on: sign up -> subscribe (with possibility to get a free tier).
“There’s no point in taking people to a garden and not letting them walk on the lawn.”
[💎@15:40] Curio removed sign up, because they were asking for information without giving anything in return. Instead they became very up front about the fact that it was a paid product (first screen is the paywall), yet allowing users to experience the product without giving any information in return. Generous, but honest and upfront.
Then adding time shift (“save for later”) was really the pathway to conviction-building.
They think a lot about activation in terms of both the signals and the point of activating users.
They found out that everyone who listens to 5-6 tracks on Curio has a 95% likelihood of listening to 7-8 tracks. Once the product has formed the habit there is a velocity.
Early on for YouTube, the activation was getting people to start watching a video. But then subscribing to a channel became a softer, easier activation.
[💎@18:30] There is the obvious form of hard activation (e.g. listening to a track), but there might be other signals as well that you can find through a more sophisticated data infrastructure. You can even find the signals that lead to a higher LTV.
[💎@19:10] Activation and revenue might not be in conflict, but they need to be thought of differently. The mindset between people coming in can be very different. Example: someone who wants to build the habit first then subscribe vs. someone who projects the future version of themselves, takes a chance on the product and subscribes directly.
This is true for a lot of subscription businesses. Example for a big publication: someone who comes to look at the news then goes away can be less or more valuable than someone who looks at the news then looks at another section. Time spent might not be the right signal.
There can be 2 pathways, 2 “user jobs”.
The question is not one of price but one of value.
[💎@20:53] When thinking about price testing, keep in mind that people are more interested in getting value than they are sensitive to price. There is actually a point where there is an inverse correlation (conversions falling when reducing price).
They initially started with 10 free tracks, mirroring what big publications do with 10 free articles and because their hard activation point was 5-6 tracks.
But they are actually thinking about what really are the best free features to make available. Example: is this listening to a track, adding to a queue or time shifting (saving it)?
[💎@21:38] When testing out the best features to make available for free, also think about the context in which users first hear about your product. Example: maybe tracks are not the most valuable to give for free (vs. saving for later) in the case where someone tells you about Curio while you’re watching Netflix.
In a way, Curio is a marketplace between content creators and users.
The biggest subscription businesses in the world are, on some level, content businesses.
For Curio, the opportunity to partner with other entities that are in the same space is invaluable. Co-productions happen all the time in the TV business.
In terms of curating the content, they think across 3 dimensions:
On top of that, they overlay a production model where they are co-producing content: original programming, directly with creators, etc. in order to create a rich tapestry of high-quality content sourcing.
Curio aims at giving people a way to access the widest breadth of content but the richest set of content, and for as many people as possible.
With publishers there is a win-win model because they care about reaching audiences, engagement and new revenue streams. And it’s hard for an organization like BBC to pivot to the kind of product they have. Partners have seen the opportunity and they grabbed it.
Curio complements what publishers do.
