The recent Kickstarter campaign for Kelp raised over $1.5 million, aided by a hot start in which it raised around $240,000 in the first 48 hours. I learned a lot from corresponding with Kelp’s publisher, Laia Gonzalez, about their advertising strategy, including a new-to-me technique: Selling a promo, accessory, or expansion in advance of the project launch.
This is in the same general realm as a tool Gamefound has offered to creators for a while: Offer a free promo to anyone who signs up for a prelaunch notification and then actually backs the project. This gift has resulted in a 24% conversion rate among successful campaigns.
The marketing and consulting service LaunchBoom has devised a variation on this strategy that involves a prelaunch expense. Kelp, for example, sold around 1,950 mini-expansions for $1 each (the value of the expansion during the campaign was around $6, so this was a nice discount). Botany and other campaigns have done something similar.
LaunchBoom has found that the conversion rate of people who spend a dollar pre-campaign is about 35-45%, vs the conversion rate of just newsletter subscribers (5-10%). Due to the impressive ways that Laia implemented this method, Kelp’s presale conversion rate was 54%. Beyond just an increased conversion rate, a creator can also use the number of presales to determine if they’re ready to launch–if you’ve only sold a dozen or so, that’s an early sign that there is more crowdbuilding work and project refinement to be done.
Crucial to either a gift or presale is transparency about the actual product itself via the preview page (or website). As Gamefound told me, “Usually, the more open they are regarding content and pricing, the better the conversion rate (potential backers can know straight away if they’re interested, and if they’re not, they just don’t follow).” Laia found that the $1 presale strategy worked particularly well while showcasing the fancy Kelp prototype at conventions.
There are a few risks and caveats (each with potential solutions):
- psychological manipulation: One of the reasons this method works is that people who spend the $1 feel financially invested in the project. If I already bought the mini-expansion, why wouldn’t I also buy the full game? Personally, I don’t want to trick anyone into buying our games: I want them to make a well-informed choice based on a wealth of information. And it’s only after they invest in the game do I want them to consider other accessories and expansions (not the other way around).
- confusion and duplicate purchases: Presale buyers may mistakenly buy the content again during the campaign. I think this can mostly be avoided by contacting those buyers upon launch to steer them towards the correct pledge level and by positioning the content as an add-on (which they don’t need to add).
- utility pending campaign failure: If the campaign doesn’t fund, what will people do with a mini-expansion or promo for a game that doesn’t exist? You may need a contingency plan for refunding those presale customers. Alternatively, you could select presale content that doesn’t require the game, like fancy resources, metal coins, or a puzzle.
- sorting who bought it and who didn’t: If you’re using one ecommerce system to accept presales for partial content and a crowdfunding platform to accept pledges, eventually you’ll need to merge those two data sets for the fulfillment center. I recommend having a plan in place for this so you’re not manually updating hundreds or thousands of pledges.
- another conversion rate to consider: Fascinating to me is another number that Gamefound provided in comparison to the 24% conversion rate for prelaunch gifts: Successful campaigns without gifts actually have a higher conversion rate of 32%. However, campaigns with gifts tend to have many more prelaunch followers.
- exclusives: Marketing consultants might advise you to make prelaunch gifts or presale content exclusive to those early followers, opposed to offering that content during and after the campaign (potentially at a higher price). It’s up to you to decide if that aligns with your personal and professional philosophy. Do you want to include or exclude?
As a creator or backer, how do you feel about the gift/presale concept? Have you participated in anything like this?
- Here’s a compelling response video from another publisher.
- Here’s an interesting video from BoardGameCo.
- Here’s a detailed video from Room and Board.
Also read:
- Bees and Seaweed: Recent Advertising Results
- Kickstarter Lesson #245: Should You Advertise and Preview Pre-Launch?
- 3 Ways to Maximize Prelaunch Signups
If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content! You can also listen to posts like this in the audio version of the blog.
18 Comments on “Prelaunch Promos, Accessories, and Expansions (KS Lesson #281)”
Leave a Comment
If you ask a question about a specific card or ability, please type the exact text in your comment to help facilitate a speedy and precise answer.
Your comment may take a few minutes to publish. Antagonistic, rude, or degrading comments will be removed. Thank you.
I don’t understand Launchboom’s recent claims that this tactic isn’t meant to be exploitative, when their site had (until a few days ago) verbiage explaining exactly how it could exploit known psychological tricks. Regardless, it doesn’t matter that much to me whether Launchboom considers it exploitative or not. I, as a backer, find it exploitative, and for that reason I’ve made a conscious decision to not back any campaigns that employ it.
Okay! Feel free to reply to Launchboom about their claims, as the above article is not about “claims that this tactic isn’t meant to be exploitative”. But I do hear that you do not support this method, which is on topic for this article.
At first, I was neutral to it, but as this marketing tactic has become more pervasive it’s made me far less interested in publishers doing this. One of my problems with it is that it’s another barrier for backers. As someone that regularly backs board games, I don’t like that there’s an added layer to early-bird rewards.
It’s already difficult to keep up with publishers offering rewards for following a campaign, but at least following games is simple and enclosed within the existing crowdfunding system. By introducing a separate site, an extra transaction, and needing to be in the know; I’m simply not interested.
For me, a publisher that choose to use this practice won’t be receiving my money. There’s many great board games available at retail and on crowdfunding. When backing a game, I’m often choosing between 3-4 that I’m interested in. Passing on games that use this practice allows me to reward the publishers that better align with my values.
You’re probably already aware, but I’ve been seeing more and more criticism of the $1 mini expansion practice and more and more creators backing out of it.
To answer the question at the end of the blog. Didn’t really mind it at first but had some hesitation. I first heard about it while listening to an interview with one of the creators of Botany. Sounded like a smart deal. It’s a little bonus for early backers and more day one backers for the creator. At the same time, I’ve never been a fan of early bird deals. There is already a sense of FOMO with crowdfunding and these a little extra FOMO on top.
Now, after listening to BoardGameCo’s opinion (thank you for adding Alex’s video link to the blog) and Room and Board’s recent video critic, which unveils some things about Launch Boom, the $1 mini expansion is much less appealing to me. If a publisher chooses to do it, it’s not an automatic hard pass for me as it is for some, but I could see myself being less likely to back the project.
Justin: Absolutely! I”ll add Room and Board’s link here as well.
The $1 buy-in is quite scummy. It’s a predatory FOMO tactic that gives backers a sensation of already having bought into the game, so they think they may as well just back the full game.
Thanks for sharing your opinion!
I was reminded of this article last night. Over the weekend, a friend and I played Harrow County, a Kickstarter currently being fulfilled from the team behind Mind MGMT. We absolute adored this game, and the next day, I was served an ad on Facebook for their next campaign, Corps of Discovery (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mindmgmt/corps-of-discovery) that was offering a $1 upfront pledge to get a 10 map pack expansion included in the order if you eventually back the campaign later this year. I ended up doing it (they said it’s fully refundable) because of how much I enjoyed their previous 2 games. Later, I wanted to send the offer to my friend, but I couldn’t find it! I checked their website, their facebook page, the KS prelaunch page, and there is nothing! I even have an order confirmation email for it, and nothing in there links me back to the original order page. Really strange! It seems like the only way to get this promotion, as far as I can tell, is to click on the ad if it’s served to you. Just found this to be an interesting approach to the $1 upfront method that I thought I would share. Thanks!
That is very odd! It seems like they would want to make it something you can share.
And a follow up: He emailed backers last night saying he had second thoughts and is refunding everyone. I can definitely appreciate his perspective.
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/3256742/1-pre-kickstarter-pledge-cancellation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRShvRqDP_A
1. If I as a post-launch customer find that there was something available and it is no longer available, I feel like I’m not getting the best value by backing now so I’ll just ignore the project altogether and wait for retail.
2. Putting a buck in beforehand for a thing with potentially more value is tempting. But I would also feel like there is less security. At least if the project doesn’t fund I get my dollar back.
3. If I am a pre-launch backer I guess I wouldn’t care if the item was exclusive as long as there is some compensation for the “risk” like the increased price after pre-launch.
The fun campaigns have been Dinosaur World and Flamecraft because of all the extra stuff they made accessible for backers. But I still like the indie ones that rely on backers.
One other thing I forgot to mention – in terms of the high conversion rate of $1 preorders vs regular backers, I am not convinced that there isn’t just a kind of selection bias at play here. How many of the $1 preorder backers who then convert would NOT have backed without the $1 preorder? In other words, are the $1 preorders just capturing the same super-interested folks that would have backed the project anyway? I’m sure it’s not 100%, but I’d be surprised if there was a truly meaningful difference in the Venn diagram of groups.
Hey Malachi,
I replied to this in your other comment.
But I’ll paraphrase a bit of it here.
I think this may be the wrong question.
It’s more so – would I have reached those super-interested folks in the first place without the $1 preorder?
And from our experience running it (and not running it), the answer is “probably not”. Mainly cause, a big part of our system is running Meta ads – and when you optimize for emails without qualifying them, you’re going to get more unqualified emails that don’t convert.
We spent waaay too much money doing that, which is why we started using the $1 reservation. And it had undeniable proof that it was great at getting people who would actually back the campaign compared to just emails.
Oh and I realize it may not be clear in this post: I’m one of the co-founders of LaunchBoom. The longer story of how we came up with the $1 strategy is in the other comment.
Nonetheless, thanks for sharing your experience and asking these questions. I think they’re very valid questions, and I’m glad you’re thinking critically about the strategy.
Best,
Victor
I have an upcoming campaign and I talked to LaunchBoom about their $1 money down strategy. I decided to try a variation of it, but I ended up getting pushback from my followers. It felt gratuitous from their perspective to put down real money long before the campaign even starts, at which point they again will put money down long before receiving their pledge. The redundancy felt like a marketing trick, not a genuine offer. Which, let’s be honest, it is (especially if, like some projects I saw did, you fumble the communication and say it’s a “deposit” when it’s most certainly not).
I don’t think marketing tactics are inherently wrong – crowdfunding campaigns require creators to be more persuasive in their messaging due to the fact that the product for sale doesn’t exist yet, and that is especially true for new creators with an unproven track record – but this one in particular made me feel oily. And my followers weren’t impressed. This is just my anecdotal experience of course, but I thought I’d share it!
Hey Malachi,
Thanks for sharing your experience using the $1 reservation strategy. I’m one of the co-founders of LaunchBoom. So I’m always interested to hear what creators do with our system outside of our guidance.
Reading your comments, I think there may be a misunderstanding of what the point of the $1 is for. It’s not to “be more persuasive” in order to increase conversion. It’s a way to make sure your prelaunch marketing dollars are going to the right place and getting the right people.
We made it because we were spending a lot of money collecting emails – only to find that they didn’t convert (we were seeing 1% or lower conversion rates on some campaigns). We found that the issue wasn’t that we weren’t being “persuasive” enough, but that we weren’t finding the right people. We were optimizing our ads to find people who liked to give out their emails, but not people who were so into the product/game that they were ready to buy it on the spot. In other words, we were finding general market people – not superfans.
As a result, we were spending thousands of dollars creating lists that just weren’t qualified. The $1 reservation fixed that. The commitment of the $1 signified to us that these were committed backers – the bonus gift was a thanks for the upfront trust. This allowed us to optimize our ads to find more people like this – which is why the conversion rate is so much higher.
This also answers your question in your other comment. “How many of the $1 preorder backers who then convert would NOT have backed without the $1 preorder?” – I believe this is the wrong question. Because the reality is, we wouldn’t have found those backers without the $1 reservation. Instead of having 2,000 emails of committed backers, we would instead have 2,000 emails of people on the fence with maybe a sliver of them being the superfan we’re looking for.
This is cause as we run social media ads – the platforms running the ads optimize to reach people that achieve the goals we’re looking for. And as we optimize ads (turning them off/increasing or decreasing spend), we also do the same. So if we’re optimizing for emails with no qualifying intent, we’ll be gathering people only somewhat interested or just curious instead of people ready to back when we launch. But if we optimize for the $1 reservations, then we know for certain that our list is qualified and have much higher confidence (much lower risk) that the launch will be successful and that our marketing spend is going to provide a strong return.
I’m sorry that your experience using the funnel made you feel oily and gave you lashback from your followers. We never wanted this to be another “marketing tactic”, but rather a useful tool that can help creators decrease their risk when launching their campaign.
– Victor
Victor,
I don’t want to attack you, but I doubt when you say “We never wanted this to be another “marketing tactic”, when your website had an entire article written about marketing tactics to psychologically manipulate potential customers and take advantage of them to increase sales. Although it’s interesting that your company has since taken down the article, it still exists thanks to the magic of internet archiving.
I’ve seen several ads attempting to have me pledge a dollar before the campaign goes live. None of those were things I wanted, but I could absolutely believe someone who does do that is ready to go in on the campaign, thus the high conversion rate. However, I’d love to receive something for being an early adopter and this sounds like a great way to do it. Kind of a perpetual early bird deal on an extra, so you’re not robbed of it if you back later, you just pay an extra $9.
I’d be a little concerned at the losses on that expansion, but really the difference between COGS and the $1 is likely not too crazy. It would probably have been a lot tougher if they stayed in the lower ten thousand range, but given their success it’s hard to argue! I’d be curious if they covered shipping for the expansion as well or if it was added directly to their game so it didn’t change the price too much.
Thanks for the write up Jamey!
Trevor I wonder if a strategy like that expansion at a dollar (for a loss) depends on a predicted success. If they were pretty confident a game would do well, then it might be a good way to catalyze even higher sales. But it seems like a risky move if you’re not sure how well something will go.