Ravi Mehta (Former CPO at Tinder, FB, TripAdvisor) is an EIR at Reforge, leading our Product Strategy program. We've been talking about product strategy in the renaissance of the B2C social category. Ravi wrote an excellent piece on what he calls The Entertainment Value Curve, explaining why TikTok is on 🔥 and Quibi is 📉. (Tweet thread here, LinkedIn conversation here).
What Is The Entertainment Value Curve?
People use social content products based on the entertainment value they derive. But what creates entertainment value? The key point is that people enjoy content differently based on who is creating and sharing.
Entertainment Value = Social Value + Production Value
Social Value = The level of personal connection the viewer has with content. Measured by creation participation rate.
Production Value = The quality of the content relative to the highest quality in the genre. Measured by a content view distribution curve (longer tail for lower production value, shorter tail for higher production value).
Successes Live Along The Curve
There are a lot of successes that live along the curve in different combinations of social and production value. The two extremes being:
Snapchat - From Ravi: *"Snapchat is at one end of the spectrum. Their AR lenses offer tools for anyone to be able to create fun content. Your friend's baby face isn't going to win any Emmys, but it will make you laugh. The production value is low, but the social value is very high. Snapchat takes a "creation first" approach by opening directly to the camera and encouraging people to "Send To" close friends as an integral part of the creative process. The result? A fun, low-stakes platform that puts the emphasis on sharing, not flexing." *****
Netflix - From Ravi: "Netflix is on the other end of the spectrum. The production value of Netflix shows is very high—so high that only a handful of elite Hollywood content creators are able to achieve Netflix's bar for production value. As result, there is limited social connection between Netflix viewers and content creators. In addition, Netflix hasn’t enabled much social interaction within its products. But, Netflix content does have social value."
Failures Live Below The Curve
This is where Quibi has gone wrong. From Ravi:
"The problem with Quibi is that the product is not optimized for the Entertainment Value Curve. Quibi added format, length, and viewing constraints that made it harder to compete with the production value of Netflix content, but did not supplement those constraints with increased social value.
Quibi is a solitary experience—both online and off. The solitary nature of Quibi’s experience is reflected in the app’s design. There are no signs of life—no signals that anyone else in the world is watching. In stark contrast, Twitch, YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok are brimming with activity. A flurry of reactions, comments, and messages make those apps feel alive.
So Where Does Quibi Go From Here?
If you were the product leader at Quibi, what would you do? Ravi's take:
"Quibi wanted to create a Netflix-killer. But users love Netflix and didn't want a Netflix killer. What they did want was an mobile-native social entertainment they could enjoy and share with their friends — TikTok.
Creating new products is not just about pulling from a lengthy menu of features as Quibi did (mobile + short + vertical video + Netflix), it is about finding a new, self-reinforcing formula for creating value in people's lives.
If I were in Quibi's shoes, a few questions come to mind for their present quandary:
How might we… make content more shareable?
How might we… make the app feel more alive?
How might we… make the audience part of the creative process?
How might we… spark conversation between the audience and the A-list community of storytellers, actors, and artists Quibi has assembled?
These are challenging questions, but loaded with opportunity. Like any good Hollywood story, Quibi might have a surprise ending."
Comments