Boost donations - Monetization

I've used the donation model with my apps for 8 years.  One thing to consider is that your downloads counts include a whole bunch of people that download something, try it for a short time, and then move on to something else, so just short term users who won't donate.

One thing I've noticed is that when I do get donations, it's often from a user that used "Contact developer" with a question, request for additional devices to be supported etc.  I try to answer all such things in a very timely manner and get the user going quickly.  And in the case of a bug, I'll still respond right away, thank the user for the report, and let them know I'm looking into it. (and usually fix it in a couple days)

I'm other words, be as responsive as you can be..

Adding a "splash screen" for donations moves you close, if not into, the "payment required" area.  If I recall there is a limit on how many times you can "nag" a user.

Ok, here it is from the "Edit App Details" screen from the store:

"(Requests for donations that do not impact app functionality are allowed. However, if your app asks for donations more than 3 times in total, please choose "Yes" below.)"

Fsallstrom said:

I was thinking to add a semi-annoying splash screen that would be disabled if the user makes a donation.

Something that is "semi annoying" doesn't seem like a good tactic.

------------------------------------

I think I've seen more donations due to being responsive to helping people. But I don't get many requests for help. So "doing more" there won't be that useful (I already am very responsive).

Beyond being more responsive (if you aren't responsive already), I doubt there's anything you can do.

I think there is also a bit of a "history" factor, but again, nothing you can do to change that.

I've had cases where a user will tell me something like:  "I had this app on my old watch, and I got a new watch and this was one of the first things I installed.  Have a beer on me!" 

I've also had cases where the donation really isn't for a single app, but for a few of my apps used over time.  My largest "multiple app" donation was something like $50US.  The way to help that is to publish more apps, and don't just do watch faces, or data field, but have a mix or different apps and app types that a user will use at the same time...

jim_m_58 said:

My largest "multiple app" donation was something like $50US.  The way to help that is to publish more apps

I have maaaybe gotten about $100 for thousands of dollars worth of time.

I have two other equally expensive ventures. But at least those result in some-what marketable skills.

Pretty much, any effort into increasing donations is still losing money. Do something else. 

If you want to boost donations, make it a paid app with a generous trial period.

Sure, it's no longer a donation but it's really the only option that will do anything.

• If you don't care about the money, just ask for donations (and live with what you get).
• If the app is free, it's pointless to care about the money.

I think many people see the motivation of a paid app is to "make a profit". But that's isn't the only reason to make it paid. It could be a way of not having to deal with people who aren't that interested or committed to your product.

I'm trying to figure this out myself as well. I have over 130k downloads and the users of my DF not only own a Garmin device but also an additional heart rate monitor. I would assume that it wouldn't brake them to donate $1. But it hardly happens. I think I got less than $50 in donations. In fact I wonder why people don't even "pay" by giving me a 5 star review!? I see apps that have significantly more reviews than mine even though they have 20 times less downloads...

One thing I was (and maybe still am) considering is adding some nice to have features that would be available only for paying users. The idea is that this would still keep the average free user happy, and thus keep the high download numbers, but also would add some value that would hopefully incentivize some users to pay. But I'm not at all convinced that the development time it adds to do this payment and then check if some feature should be enabled or not is worth it. In my specific case I have another problem which is that currently I support all devices that have datafields (some have only 16kB memory, some only 32kB) and adding code for the payment is not possible. So I might still do it somehow for newer devices that have at least 64kB memory, but that's only a small (though logically slowly growing) portion of the users.

Yes I think you are right, dependning on how often the splash screen is shown. 

flocsy🤠 said:

and thus keep the high download numbers

High download numbers (non-paid) aren’t useful to you. 

flocsy🤠 said:

But I'm not at all convinced that the development time it adds to do this payment and then check if some feature should be enabled or not is worth it.

It’s certainly “not worth it” to have a free app. 

Adding the payment code is something new to learn and you get (some) money for it. 

====================

It’s not comparable (probably) but I have two paid Windows apps.

They are $3 and $5 dollars.

There is a thirty day trial period. So people have well enough time to figure out whether it’s worth it.

The conversion rate is 20-30%.

These still cost way more to develop than they earn (so it’s not worth them being paid).

Re: "High download numbers (non-paid) aren’t useful to you."
Well yes, the download numbers don't pay my rent, but they keep (I hope) my app coming up in a better position in the searches, and give the potential user a way to decide to use an app with 130k downloads vs one that has 2k.

Regarding adding the payment code and how much money it would give me: obviously I won't know until I'll try it, but I'm not sure it will give more than now with donations. But this also depends on how my product manager (me) and my marketing manager (I) would go on with this :) A probable way would to add new (or some of the new) features only for pro users. Then the question is which features would be added for everyone and which only for the paying users. But there can be another more agressive way by moving some of the ezisting features to be pro-only, but that would maybe alienate some of the existing users...