All projects: Gel, Jobs, Good Todo, Games, Uncle Mark, Blog, Bit Literacy
David Pogue shares a description of a failed effort to create a dirt-simple competitor to feature-packed Quicken software. Skeptical product managers gave two main reasons why it wouldn't work:
First, the product manager would never meet her employer’s aggressive financial objectives selling shrink-wrapped software priced at $15 a copy. Second, everyone on the client team assured me that it would be impossible to receive a positive review of a dirt-simple $15 software product from someone like you. “Imagine the product comparison grid on the back of the box: our product has to have more check marks against more features than Quicken. Even if they never get used…”
The equation is much the same today... except instead of impressing a few print journalists, a product has to impress many techie bloggers. The latest and greatest acronyms and features are usually a plus (even if they're not important to most users).
They were right that they wouldn't have been able to sell shrink-wrapped personal finance software for $15. They missed the point. If they'd made free personal finance software and put it on the net, all of the checkbox comparisons go away, or are at the very least minimized with reviewers. Rather than try to compete head-to-head, reframe the comparison so you come out ahead.
Case in point: mint.com -- one of the best-reviewed products on the web in the last year. It's free, it does most of what Quicken does, and several things Quicken doesn't. The reviews that did compare it to Quicken did it in a context of how Quicken would now have to compete with free.
Good point, Aaron. I know there are several Web 2.0 finance sites that have gotten a lot of attention.
Re the story Pogue relates, to be totally accurate, I think they were referring to an old pre-Web case study - back when shrinkwrap really was in use - and so the Net wouldn't have been an option.