作者：Zoya Street

本周三，Mobile Beat大会上的小组辩论陈述了一个事实，即谷歌的存档中并没有足够的信用卡细节能够帮助他们从用户身上获取盈利。隔天，我收到一封提供了Google Play上一本免费电子书的电子邮件。

该电子书的选题很棒，即关于Android手机的摄影指导。我不确定这一特殊活动是否基于我的研究历史。但是不 管怎样，我希望能够免费获得一本有关摄影的书籍，所以便点击了写着“免费”字样的巨大绿色按键。然后谷歌便要求我输入信用卡信息。

我便愣住了。这本书明明是免费的。我却需要支付一张0美元的账单。该账单与我在下载了一款免费应用后受到来自电子邮件的iTunes声明并无两样。到这里为止一切都还算顺利。在我填好信用卡信息后，我便将电子书下载到手机上。

在快速浏览了产品评论后我发现，要求用户提供信用卡信息作为免费产品的回报已经引起了广泛的争议，给出5颗星评论的用户认为：“反正谷歌没向你的帐号收一分钱，”“谷歌并没有想要跟你要钱。”而给出一颗星评论的用户却不相信，他们认为：“既然这是免费的，你便不应该问我信用卡号码。”

在美国，谷歌一直尝试着推动手机付费的简单化，并基于Google Wallet计划去提高转换率。但事实上，许多人的Google Wallet却是空的：这里面根本没有任何银行卡。而MobileBeat上的小组辩论对于手机付费问题的看法是，在最终付费前，75%的消费者会选择放弃，根据来自Braintree的Aunkur Arya，手机钱包并不能解决什么问题。Stripe的John Collison指出，当手机钱包发挥有效作用时，没人会认为这是一个手机钱包；反而会将其当成一种应用。Uber作为让用户通过电子进行付费的服务，并未被当成是一种钱包，但是它却能够轻松做到手机钱包所望尘莫及的无缝付费。

很多人都相信，苹果之所以未出现这种盈利问题是因为大多数iPhone拥有者都将信用卡与自己的帐号绑定在一起。我建议大多数iPhone用户都不要将自己的iTunes帐号当成一种手机钱包：这只是他们购买音乐的一种方式。当iPhone发行时，手机付费只是关于输入密码的行动。用户可以用自己的帐号去支付其他人的应用，但前提是必须绑定苹果音乐商店。正是这种关系造就了iOS平台上的业务发展。

并不是所有对在Google Play中输入信用卡信息去获得一本免费书籍感到不安的用户都会担心该摄影指导的隐藏成本。有些人知道自己与谷歌的关系将会发生改变，即谷歌最初是作为信息门户网站，而现在他们之间的关系越来越趋向交易性。一次购买将遭致下一次的购买（游戏邦注：特别是当第二次购买只需要输入密码时）。

而谷歌在电子书销售上的慷慨也让我们知道，他们其实知道手机付费并不只是关于钱包。这是关于关系。从整体上来看，这种免费销售将搭建起该平台与更多潜在用户之间的关系，即使这些关系会因为付费信息的收集而变质。

许多应用开发者们正在遵循着游戏开发者们去学习如何做到足够慷慨。来自Tapjoy的Jeff Drobick指出：“大多数游戏都有虚拟货币。但是在游戏外却并非如此。如此便导致我们很难从付费内容中赚钱，因为并不存在让用户免费打开这些内容的方法。”他认为，让用户免费打开功能并不会阻止他们在同样的功能上消费，反而有可能鼓励这种消费。

（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Apps, relationships and the nature of money

By Zoya Street

On Wednesday this week, panellists at the Mobile Beat conference lamented the fact that Google had too few credit card details on file to monetise their users well. One day later, I got an email offering me a free ebook on Google Play.

The subject was chosen perfectly: a photography how-to for Android phones. I don’t know whether this particular campaign was chosen for me based on my search history, which I’m sure reveals me as a pretentious design wonk. In any case, I was eager to get a free book about photography, so I clicked the big green button with FREE written on it. And then Google asked for my card details.

I paused. Yes, the book was free. I was being charged a bill for $0. The bill didn’t look so different to those iTunes statements I get by email after downloading a free app. Nothing untoward here. After okaying the card details, I downloaded the book to my phone.

A quick glance at the product reviews showed that asking users for credit card details in return for a free gift had caused quite a stir, with 5-star reviews appearing to assure the writers of one-star reviews: ‘Nothing is charged to your account,’ ‘Google is not out to get you’. One-star reviews were not convinced: ‘Please, if it’s free you don’t need my credit card number.’

In the US, Google is trying to facilitate smoother mobile payments, and higher conversion rates, with a scheme called Google Wallet. Many people’s Google Wallets are empty: they have no cards in them. But the panellists at MobileBeat suggest that the problem with mobile payments–75% of shopping sessions on mobile drop-off before a payment is made, according to Aunkur Arya of Braintree–is not something to be solved with mobile wallets. John Collison of Stripe pointed out that when a mobile wallet functions well, nobody thinks of it as a mobile wallet; it is just another app. Uber, a service that hails cabs for you and pays them electronically, is not thought of as a wallet, but it enables seamless mobile payments with the frictionlessness that is sought from mobile wallets.

It’s widely believed that the reason Apple doesn’t have as serious a problem monetising its users is that most iPhone owners have a credit card associated with their account. I’d suggest that most iPhone users probably don’t think of their iTunes account as a mobile wallet: it began as a way to buy music. By the time the iPhone launched, mobile payments were only a password screen away. That account may be paying for microtransactions in other people’s apps, but it began as a relationship with Apple’s music store. It’s those kind of relationships that are enabling the commerce on iOS.

Not all of the users who felt uneasy at entering their credit card details into Google Play to get a free book were worrying about an immediate hidden cost for that photography guide. Some will have been aware that their relationship with Google was about to change–where Google had previously been a portal of information, now the relationship was becoming transactional. One purchase begets another, especially when the second is just a password screen away.

Still, Google’s generosity with this ebook shows that they might actually understand that mobile payments aren’t about wallets. They’re about relationships. It’s likely that on the whole, this freebie will have been a positive start to a lot of new relationships with potential customers, even if some of those relationships were soured by the collection of payment information.

App developers are learning about generosity following the example set by game developers. Jeff Drobick from Tapjoy pointed out, ‘most games have a virtual currency. Outside of gaming, that’s not always the case. That makes it harder to charge for premium content, because there aren’t ways for users to unlock that content for free.’ In his view, making it possible for users to unlock features for free doesn’t inhibit spending on those same features, but actually encourages it.(source:gamesbrief)

手机付费所强调的是关系而非钱包

作者：Zoya Street

本周三，Mobile Beat大会上的小组辩论陈述了一个事实，即谷歌的存档中

并没有足够的信用卡细节能够帮助他们从用户身上获取盈利。隔天，我收到

一封提供了Google Play上一本免费电子书的电子邮件。

该电子书的选题很棒，即关于Android手机的摄影指导。我不确定这一特殊

活动是否基于我的研究历史（这便能够揭露出我是个自命不凡的设计师）。

但是不管怎样，我希望能够免费获得一本有关摄影的书籍，所以便点击了写

着“免费”字样的巨大绿色按键。然后谷歌便要求我输入信用卡信息。

我便愣住了。这本书明明是免费的。我却需要支付一张0美元的账单。该账

单与我在下载了一款免费应用后受到来自电子邮件的iTunes声明并无两样。

到这里为止一切都还算顺利。在我填好信用卡信息后，我便将电子书下载到

手机上。

在快速浏览了产品评论后我发现，要求用户提供信用卡信息作为免费产品的

回报已经引起了广泛的争议，给出5颗星评论的用户认为：“反正谷歌没向

你的帐号收一分钱，”“谷歌并没有想要跟你要钱。”而给出一颗星评论的

用户却不相信，他们认为：“既然这是免费的，你便不应该问我信用卡号码

。”

在美国，谷歌一直尝试着推动手机付费的简单化，并基于Google Wallet计

划去提高转换率。但事实上，许多人的Google Wallet却是空的：这里面根

本没有任何银行卡。而MobileBeat上的小组辩论对于手机付费问题的看法是

，在最终付费前，75%的消费者会选择放弃，根据来自Braintree的Aunkur

Arya，手机钱包并不能解决什么问题。Stripe的John Collison指出，当手

机钱包发挥有效作用时，没人会认为这是一个手机钱包；反而会将其当成一

种应用。Uber作为让用户通过电子进行付费的服务，并未被当成是一种钱包

，但是它却能够轻松做到手机钱包所望尘莫及的无缝付费。

很多人都相信，苹果之所以未出现这种盈利问题是因为大多数iPhone拥有者

都将信用卡与自己的帐号绑定在一起。我建议大多数iPhone用户都不要将自

己的iTunes帐号当成一种手机钱包：这只是他们购买音乐的一种方式。当

iPhone发行时，手机付费只是关于输入密码的行动。用户可以用自己的帐号

去支付其他人的应用，但前提是必须绑定苹果音乐商店。正是这种关系造就

了iOS平台上的业务发展。

并不是所有对在Google Play中输入信用卡信息去获得一本免费书籍感到不

安的用户都会担心该摄影指导的隐藏成本。有些人知道自己与谷歌的关系将

会发生改变，即谷歌最初是作为信息门户网站，而现在他们之间的关系越来

越趋向交易性。一次购买将遭致下一次的购买（游戏邦注：特别是当第二次

购买只需要输入密码时）。

而谷歌在电子书销售上的慷慨也让我们知道，他们其实知道手机付费并不只

是关于钱包。这是关于关系。从整体上来看，这种免费销售将搭建起该平台

与更多潜在用户之间的关系，即使这些关系会因为付费信息的收集而变质。

许多应用开发者们正在遵循着游戏开发者们去学习如何做到足够慷慨。来自

Tapjoy的Jeff Drobick指出：“大多数游戏都有虚拟货币。但是在游戏外却

并非如此。如此便导致我们很难从付费内容中赚钱，因为并不存在让用户免

费打开这些内容的方法。”他认为，让用户免费打开功能并不会阻止他们在

同样的功能上消费，反而有可能鼓励这种消费。

（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转

载请联系：游戏邦）

Apps, relationships and the nature of money

By Zoya Street

On Wednesday this week, panellists at the Mobile Beat conference

lamented the fact that Google had too few credit card details on

file to monetise their users well. One day later, I got an email

offering me a free ebook on Google Play.

The subject was chosen perfectly: a photography how-to for Android

phones. I don’t know whether this particular campaign was chosen

for me based on my search history, which I’m sure reveals me as a

pretentious design wonk. In any case, I was eager to get a free

book about photography, so I clicked the big green button with

FREE written on it. And then Google asked for my card details.

I paused. Yes, the book was free. I was being charged a bill for

$0. The bill didn’t look so different to those iTunes statements

I get by email after downloading a free app. Nothing untoward

here. After okaying the card details, I downloaded the book to my

phone.

A quick glance at the product reviews showed that asking users for

credit card details in return for a free gift had caused quite a

stir, with 5-star reviews appearing to assure the writers of one-

star reviews: ‘Nothing is charged to your account,’ ‘Google is

not out to get you’. One-star reviews were not convinced:

‘Please, if it’s free you don’t need my credit card number.’

In the US, Google is trying to facilitate smoother mobile

payments, and higher conversion rates, with a scheme called Google

Wallet. Many people’s Google Wallets are empty: they have no

cards in them. But the panellists at MobileBeat suggest that the

problem with mobile payments–75% of shopping sessions on mobile

drop-off before a payment is made, according to Aunkur Arya of

Braintree–is not something to be solved with mobile wallets. John

Collison of Stripe pointed out that when a mobile wallet functions

well, nobody thinks of it as a mobile wallet; it is just another

app. Uber, a service that hails cabs for you and pays them

electronically, is not thought of as a wallet, but it enables

seamless mobile payments with the frictionlessness that is sought

from mobile wallets.

It’s widely believed that the reason Apple doesn’t have as

serious a problem monetising its users is that most iPhone owners

have a credit card associated with their account. I’d suggest

that most iPhone users probably don’t think of their iTunes

account as a mobile wallet: it began as a way to buy music. By the

time the iPhone launched, mobile payments were only a password

screen away. That account may be paying for microtransactions in

other people’s apps, but it began as a relationship with Apple’s

music store. It’s those kind of relationships that are enabling

the commerce on iOS.

Not all of the users who felt uneasy at entering their credit card

details into Google Play to get a free book were worrying about an

immediate hidden cost for that photography guide. Some will have

been aware that their relationship with Google was about to change

–where Google had previously been a portal of information, now

the relationship was becoming transactional. One purchase begets

another, especially when the second is just a password screen

away.

Still, Google’s generosity with this ebook shows that they might

actually understand that mobile payments aren’t about wallets.

They’re about relationships. It’s likely that on the whole, this

freebie will have been a positive start to a lot of new

relationships with potential customers, even if some of those

relationships were soured by the collection of payment

information.

App developers are learning about generosity following the example

set by game developers. Jeff Drobick from Tapjoy pointed out,

‘most games have a virtual currency. Outside of gaming, that’s

not always the case. That makes it harder to charge for premium

content, because there aren’t ways for users to unlock that

content for free.’ In his view, making it possible for users to

unlock features for free doesn’t inhibit spending on those same

features, but actually encourages it.(source:gamesbrief)

http://www.gamesbrief.com/2013/07/apps-relationships-and-the-

nature-of-money/