The bear case for Super-apps in India
Whatsapp is synonymous with the Indian internet with near universal reach amongst those who can afford smartphones. So, tech-nerds like me get delirious imagining the possibilities that could be unlocked if Whatsapp went ahead and launched a full-blown developer platform like WeChat did with mini-programs in China.
Beyond just Whatsapp, I was initially bullish on super-apps gaining traction in India but have since revised my opinion. My initial bull case post is below. Super-apps are coming to the Indian Internet - 1/ The battle for the Indian internet started off with e-commerce -Moving the mall online My reasons (in short):
- Consumers get a “single-window” experience with consistent identity and payment tools- A super-app also meant lower storage space which seemed important for low-end smartphone users.
This, I believe was Tazpo’s hypothesis.- On the supply side, app-makers get to ride on the distribution of the super- app.- They also get ready made payments and identity infra.
Sounds good, so what changed my beliefs?
First, China is a unique market in having a fragmented app store ecosystem. China has over 400 app stores! Reach and demographics vary across stores. See: https://mintegral.com/en/blog/the-chinese-mobile-apps-market-all-you-need-to-know-about-app-distribution/ App distribution is a severe problem. It’s easy to see why developers would love something like WeChat mini-programs giving them wide distribution and near universal reach, way better than managing 7–8 (or more) different app stores.
It’s not that Chinese users are different, they too prefer single-brand/simple apps. However, there are structural reasons (no ad networks, low SEO scope) that limit distribution of new apps and make mini-programs much more viable . Sheiji Ho goes into this argument here:
Super Apps: Nothing Much Super About Them - Why they’re not uniquely Chinese and why they’re here in the first place The second reason is user experience. Super-apps are the portals of yore, crowded experiences cramped with things. Users want a clear mapping of icon to use-case . They also break a pattern too many of us have gotten used to. Get app = Go to play store. Use app = Poke icon. Can this habit change? Maybe! ~300 Mn Indians have onboarded to smartphones . Just 1.1 billion more to go! So there’s ample scope for change.
UPI provides great payment infra and user-experience weakening the opportunity for any app to do the same.
The post-Jio infinite data world means that the network solves the storage problem (in a way). When needed I can just download an app quickly. It’s just 15–50 Mb, not a big deal.
Finally, Super-apps must regulate their notifications to prevent over-loading their users — this is an example of a general conflict between a super-app and the programs it distributes. Native apps are also perceived as superior experiences . Both reasons that might make app developers skeptical of choosing a “super-app” as a primary distribution approach.
In summary: Viable distribution structures for apps, a good payment infra, low data costs, habits of users and incentives for developers reduce the viability of super-app in India.
Of course, the question is ” What about Paytm, Grab, GoJek, etc.? ” who are also called super-apps. I don’t see these as comparable. The above are examples of funding-driven good ol horizontal integration, an effort to maximise LTV from existing app users . Which I wouldn’t call the same as a super-app with third-party players building experiences inside it. The moniker doesn’t fit.
There’s one (rare) possibility I didn’t discuss — the case of parallel universes. India being a huge market might see pockets of different distribution modes dominate in different places . E.g., Imagine urban users following the western app store model, while rural other users might adopt something else due to telco-partnerships. Thanks for reading! Don’t hold back your praise or criticism, let it be seen in the comments . For more unwanted commentary, follow @dalan Mendonca on twitter.