The apparent "death" of Meerkat is telling of the limits of the media to influence users, a limit that I generally did not think existed anymore. For me, conventional wisdom always pointed to the fact that the media influences users' decisions - their wants and their needs. However, the evolution of Meerkat, or lack thereof, portray a different picture entirely.
For some background, Meerkat is a live video streaming app. Essentially, you can use your iPhone to stream video of whatever you're currently looking at to broadcast to the user base. Meerkat garnered impressive media coverage on the new app; enough to make your average consumer believe that the hot new app was as excellent as the media portrayed it. While Meerkat was making its rounds, Twitter announced that it acquired Periscope, another live streaming app which went live on March 26th. On the same day Meerkat made news by receiving $14 million in new funding. Somehow all the media hype around Meerkat didn't matter. By Sunday, Periscope had cracked the top 30 on iTunes while Meerkat fell to No. 523. And thus is the nature of competition.
When considering Meerkat's huge decline, hard facts about Meerkat's popularity even before Periscope come to light - the facts being that Meerkat was never more than a glorified media sensation. The highest Meerkat ever ranked was No. 140 on March 20th. And yet Meerkat still raked in $14 million last week all due to the media push behind the app calling it "the breakout of the century." Essentially, the media frenzy was able to make a difference for investors; however, it meant nothing well it came to actual consumers. Why and how did Meerkat gain so much of a media frenzy anyway when it was never that popular? My best guess is that it goes to show the power of tech bloggers in the internet age. Enough of them commented on the app, which was somehow enough to bandwagon extensive media coverage. Alas, it was for nothing which brings me to wonder on how these bloggers and reporters can be so wrong with their forecasts. I guess thus is the nature of game where predicting consumer behavior in the appverse might be more complicated than originally anticipated. It's comical and a little sad to see how far Meerkat has dropped despite all of the hype. Overall, the evolution of Meerkat is an extremely interesting look at the limits to media which questions how accurate tech media is anticipated to be.
Also, how cool and freaky is the entire premise of Meerkat and Periscope. I thought aggregated Snapchat stories from various users was an innovative feature that let you experience what others were doing. Live stream pushes that envelope even further. It seems to follow the trend of consumers wanting to do everything/have everything/experience everything all at once. Want to be awake only by 9 am in NJ and still catch the sunrise. Not a problem, I'm sure someone's livestreaming the sunrise from California.
http://bgr.com/2015/03/30/meerkat-vs-periscope-analysis-journalism/
For some background, Meerkat is a live video streaming app. Essentially, you can use your iPhone to stream video of whatever you're currently looking at to broadcast to the user base. Meerkat garnered impressive media coverage on the new app; enough to make your average consumer believe that the hot new app was as excellent as the media portrayed it. While Meerkat was making its rounds, Twitter announced that it acquired Periscope, another live streaming app which went live on March 26th. On the same day Meerkat made news by receiving $14 million in new funding. Somehow all the media hype around Meerkat didn't matter. By Sunday, Periscope had cracked the top 30 on iTunes while Meerkat fell to No. 523. And thus is the nature of competition.
When considering Meerkat's huge decline, hard facts about Meerkat's popularity even before Periscope come to light - the facts being that Meerkat was never more than a glorified media sensation. The highest Meerkat ever ranked was No. 140 on March 20th. And yet Meerkat still raked in $14 million last week all due to the media push behind the app calling it "the breakout of the century." Essentially, the media frenzy was able to make a difference for investors; however, it meant nothing well it came to actual consumers. Why and how did Meerkat gain so much of a media frenzy anyway when it was never that popular? My best guess is that it goes to show the power of tech bloggers in the internet age. Enough of them commented on the app, which was somehow enough to bandwagon extensive media coverage. Alas, it was for nothing which brings me to wonder on how these bloggers and reporters can be so wrong with their forecasts. I guess thus is the nature of game where predicting consumer behavior in the appverse might be more complicated than originally anticipated. It's comical and a little sad to see how far Meerkat has dropped despite all of the hype. Overall, the evolution of Meerkat is an extremely interesting look at the limits to media which questions how accurate tech media is anticipated to be.
Also, how cool and freaky is the entire premise of Meerkat and Periscope. I thought aggregated Snapchat stories from various users was an innovative feature that let you experience what others were doing. Live stream pushes that envelope even further. It seems to follow the trend of consumers wanting to do everything/have everything/experience everything all at once. Want to be awake only by 9 am in NJ and still catch the sunrise. Not a problem, I'm sure someone's livestreaming the sunrise from California.
http://bgr.com/2015/03/30/meerkat-vs-periscope-analysis-journalism/
No comments:
Post a Comment