I'd be interested in confirming what you mean by 'too safe'. I would argue that if a business idea generates interest and would work in the market, I would consider 'too risky' to be a very serious concern but 'too safe' not to be so much. I don't exactly follow what the concern is here.
It's debatable, on one level I can see it not being an issue if it uses familiar concepts and is something that you know there would be interest in, but also at the same time if an idea would be deemed too safe there could be reduced interest in it as people are often looking for something different and exciting to play instead. We'll see what the public's stance on it was when I reveal results.
It depends whether you want to be a groundbreaking app in the market or not. If the aim is to be a modest app that might generate some interest then you probably succeeded, but I think Niall's question is in regards to whether you would get enough people playing to make the multiplayer aspects work. And for the purposes of this task, whether you would get enough people voting for it over a more 'original' idea. We're about find out anyway!
Do you think the privacy aspect would still be enough for people to want to play though? Do you think people would still be worried about other people hearing their singing, regardless of their anonymity?
I think it would be. Singing shows like the X Factor and American Idol are prime examples of this where there are tens of thousands of applicants auditioning in front of millions of people. These are not just younger demographics as we have seen from X Factor - there are thousands of applicants in the Over 28s category too. These people clearly want their singing to be heard. And you do have people coming on who are incredibly nervous and shy but they are still able to do it because the singing aspect of it itself is incredibly enjoyable and in some ways even therapeutic. Karaoke the game too also demonstrates that - where people in familiar surroundings enjoy laughing and joking around singing songs they love. I think the singing aspect of it itself is enough for people to want a singing game app to play.
Anyou have different options to play the app in - such as in arguably more familiar and more comfortable surroundings with people you know like family or friends. Our whole marketing campaign and slogan is based off the idea that our app is incredibly accessible and could be used in many social scenarios such as family dinners, parties, nights out with friends and family gatherings. All sorts of different options are available to people in terms of the actual interactivity itself which can ease different kinds of people into the game.
Thank you Alex, so not a complete thrashing but a relatively comfortable win for Team Aptitude, congratulations!
I must say that I did have a few qualms about your idea when I first heard it, but having read your pitch I was definitely convinced and I particularly liked the detail you went into about the miniature games, as well as other additions such as the gadgets and also your decision to make the game free but use in game advertising. This is an app I could see potentially being successful, so well done!
Also Iain, as I said earlier you were definitely thrown into the deep end with this task being made PM straight away so I am definitely impressed with your debut into this game, and the appraisals of you as a PM seem to be mostly positive. Well done!
Unfortunately Team Inspired, you have not won and must remain in the boardroom.
Also Iain, as I said earlier you were definitely thrown into the deep end with this task being made PM straight away so I am definitely impressed with your debut into this game, and the appraisals of you as a PM seem to be mostly positive. Well done
Okay, so I received lots of comments from viewers about your app which we will get to in a minute but before we get to that, any initial thoughts on why you lost?
Maybe the fact that it was an interactive singing application doomed from the start. Perhaps we underestimated people's willingness to engage in a platform which puts a person in the spotlight and their perceived confidence in playing an application with online people.
Also maybe it was because unlike Draw Something the application could not be played in just any public place. Perhaps people felt it would lead to awkward situations in trains and buses and really would be just a bedroom application. And maybe we failed to convince them that that was not the case?
I think personaly it was advertising as viewers i felt didnt understand
Interesting that you both mention the advert, a few viewers stated that they liked it with one even saying it was the only thing they liked out of your pitch. However some people did take issue, personally I feel it was a good idea for an advert but I think it could have been executed better, I think you overcomplicated things with it and there was too much going on and I don't think it would translate all that well to the TV. Do you think this is a fair appraisal? Who in the team was responsible for creating the advert?
Interesting that you both mention the advert, a few viewers stated that they liked it with one even saying it was the only thing they liked out of your pitch. However some people did take issue, personally I feel it was a good idea for an advert but I think it could have been executed better, I think you overcomplicated things with it and there was too much going on and I don't think it would translate all that well to the TV. Do you think this is a fair appraisal? Who in the team was responsible for creating the advert?
I initially wanted to put Zak in it as I thought he would definitely have the potential to make a witty, tongue and cheek advert which would appeal to people. But Zak wanted to do the target demographic and why it would appeal to people as he said that that was his particular strength, and he seemed like a really good analytic person to put for that particular role. I then put Steve in charge of the advert as he had previously shown great creativity in making the design for a previous task, and it would be a great way for him to show that he is quite a creative person. Steve came up with the speech bits and Shadi came up with the family template.
My personal feelings on the advert were that it was a good way of showcasing what are unique selling points are as well as our target demographic. After giving it a read through - I think the speech bits may have disrupted the flow and fluidity of the advert and I did question at a point whether this would be too clumped and whether it feels like it is too long. But I wanted to stick with it as a way of showing off the unique aspects of our application. And there was a bit where I felt the advert does not correspond to the young demo and that it was too family orientated. But again I felt it was a good way of showing the mass appeal to different age groups through a family spread.
Ok, well whilst I feel there was room for improvement with your advert, I don't think it ultimately cost you the task. I will now get on to some of the comments given to me by viewers which may give some insight as to why you lost...
-The lack of practicality in the app in terms of it not suiting a public environment, such as public transport for example, where apps are most likely to be utilised.
-The distinction between the free package and the one that cost, some people felt the free package was too restricted and did not think the idea of only allowing to play with facebook friends was a good idea.
-The lack of mass appeal of the app, as they did not feel it is something that a large amount of people would be interested in.
Do you think these comments are fair? There were positive comments for your app as well and a quite a few people who voted, but most of these seemed to be more focused on how it sounded like a fun and unique idea. I think really where you fell down is the fact that there would be too many issues in terms of people actually wanting to play this app in real life. In hindsight do you wish you'd gone with a different idea?
Comments
I think it would be. Singing shows like the X Factor and American Idol are prime examples of this where there are tens of thousands of applicants auditioning in front of millions of people. These are not just younger demographics as we have seen from X Factor - there are thousands of applicants in the Over 28s category too. These people clearly want their singing to be heard. And you do have people coming on who are incredibly nervous and shy but they are still able to do it because the singing aspect of it itself is incredibly enjoyable and in some ways even therapeutic. Karaoke the game too also demonstrates that - where people in familiar surroundings enjoy laughing and joking around singing songs they love. I think the singing aspect of it itself is enough for people to want a singing game app to play.
Anyou have different options to play the app in - such as in arguably more familiar and more comfortable surroundings with people you know like family or friends. Our whole marketing campaign and slogan is based off the idea that our app is incredibly accessible and could be used in many social scenarios such as family dinners, parties, nights out with friends and family gatherings. All sorts of different options are available to people in terms of the actual interactivity itself which can ease different kinds of people into the game.
Alex, can you please reveal how many votes Team Inspired received?
Therefore Aptitude have won this task. Congratulations!
Good luck to Roxie and the rest of Inspired.
I must say that I did have a few qualms about your idea when I first heard it, but having read your pitch I was definitely convinced and I particularly liked the detail you went into about the miniature games, as well as other additions such as the gadgets and also your decision to make the game free but use in game advertising. This is an app I could see potentially being successful, so well done!
Also Iain, as I said earlier you were definitely thrown into the deep end with this task being made PM straight away so I am definitely impressed with your debut into this game, and the appraisals of you as a PM seem to be mostly positive. Well done!
Unfortunately Team Inspired, you have not won and must remain in the boardroom.
Thank you Lord Sugar
Maybe we tried too hard, maybe the advert structure was off putting, maybe the idea of singing on an app in public wouldn't be ideal?
It could be any of those.
I think personaly it was advertising as viewers i felt didnt understand
Also maybe it was because unlike Draw Something the application could not be played in just any public place. Perhaps people felt it would lead to awkward situations in trains and buses and really would be just a bedroom application. And maybe we failed to convince them that that was not the case?
I initially wanted to put Zak in it as I thought he would definitely have the potential to make a witty, tongue and cheek advert which would appeal to people. But Zak wanted to do the target demographic and why it would appeal to people as he said that that was his particular strength, and he seemed like a really good analytic person to put for that particular role. I then put Steve in charge of the advert as he had previously shown great creativity in making the design for a previous task, and it would be a great way for him to show that he is quite a creative person. Steve came up with the speech bits and Shadi came up with the family template.
My personal feelings on the advert were that it was a good way of showcasing what are unique selling points are as well as our target demographic. After giving it a read through - I think the speech bits may have disrupted the flow and fluidity of the advert and I did question at a point whether this would be too clumped and whether it feels like it is too long. But I wanted to stick with it as a way of showing off the unique aspects of our application. And there was a bit where I felt the advert does not correspond to the young demo and that it was too family orientated. But again I felt it was a good way of showing the mass appeal to different age groups through a family spread.
-The lack of practicality in the app in terms of it not suiting a public environment, such as public transport for example, where apps are most likely to be utilised.
-The distinction between the free package and the one that cost, some people felt the free package was too restricted and did not think the idea of only allowing to play with facebook friends was a good idea.
-The lack of mass appeal of the app, as they did not feel it is something that a large amount of people would be interested in.
Do you think these comments are fair? There were positive comments for your app as well and a quite a few people who voted, but most of these seemed to be more focused on how it sounded like a fun and unique idea. I think really where you fell down is the fact that there would be too many issues in terms of people actually wanting to play this app in real life. In hindsight do you wish you'd gone with a different idea?