ABOUT PAULA: LinkedIn  | Twitter

OTHER RESOURCES MENTIONED IN THE SHOW:

Paula’s talk at Mobile Spree 2018

Leveraging Player Motivation Models to Increase App Engagement – Part 1, 2, 3.

ABOUT ROCKETSHIP HQ: Website | LinkedIn  | Twitter | YouTube

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

🏅 What inspired Paula to start using psychological frameworks to understand gamer motivation. 

🔑 The key psychological models and frameworks that are relevant for understanding gamer motivation.

🎮 How psychological models help point to the kinds of players a game will attract.📊 How Paula adapted models originally made for AAA games for an F2P context.

📈 How to evaluate a game as per a psychological model prior to its launch.

🧐 How psychological models help align on a vision for the game.

🤝 How to resolve disagreements that may come up when evaluating a game according to a psychological model.

👀 How Paula and her team structure their competitive analysis.

🧑‍🤝‍🧑 How to address resistance to applying psychological models within a team.

📄 How user testing, surveys and focus groups fit into the process of applying psychological models.

⚙️ How UA can be used to test user archetypes.

💬 How in-game user behavior can be tied back to the creatives or messaging that brought a user in.

🏃‍♀️  How psychological models can be applied to a game that is already live and active.

🕹️ How a game developer might start implementing psychological models.

KEY QUOTES

Understanding gamer motivation with psychology

There is an axis that’s fantasy versus realism, and another one that’s builder versus explorer, and you would score your game on that axis. But that axis is very AAA, like fantasy realism – you can’t talk about that in mobile free to play. Like when you have all these match three abstract games. So a big part of my job here was to try and get his theory, go back to hit the psychology books and say, how can I get this essence but try and transform it into things that make sense for mobile free to play

Team alignment is a huge time-saver

If you use the taste maps, which is what I just mentioned, you have basically the four charts and you score your game against all the factors. And it’s a really interesting communication tool, because we wouldn’t do it together. If we were in the same game team,I would do it separately, you would do it separately and then we would, the main stakeholders would do that exercise, and then we would talk about it. Typically we would see very different very, very different results per person. And then I realize someone’s vision for this is completely different than mine. So the first thing is that we align our visions of stakeholders, that saves so much time, so much rework and so much time.

There are many ways to approach pre-prod

I’ve done it where people would think on their own time and then we would adjourn in a four hour meeting to align everything because this alignment period is never fast, because you’re ironing out the communication. I’ve done it in a way also that we took a week to do a workshop focused on figuring out the vision and the mission and everything for the game. 

The way to win discussions each time

The best way to mitigate resistance is when you pitch something like this, you know, we need to do this, you come prepared with articles, with things that will show people that it’s not just me saying this will help us because these other companies did this, because I’ve done this in the past and look at the results that we had. So usually resistance, I try to fight with evidence and data. 

User testing is critical

We tell the team, “Listen, these are the archetypes we came up with or the personas or whatever word you want to use. Let’s do two things. Let’s run user tests and ask them specific questions and see how they’re playing.” But also something that really really helps us is putting in game surveys – and these in game surveys, they work in a way where they ask users about specific features. 

Player analytics contain great insights

We have their user IDs, as well. So after we do that, we go into our analytics platform, we check their IDs, and see how they’re playing the game and see if it makes sense with our vision of that archetype playing the game, and what they’re saying that they’re doing. So user research helps us throughout the whole process.

How to use UA to test archetypes

The way we like to approach this is to do appeal tests. What would a creative look like for persona A, for persona B and  for persona C. So if persona A is more a thrill driven person, we will look for the most thrilling features that we have or that we currently planned and put that in the forefront in the video or in the static, videos are better for that. So we will do that for the different ones. We will gauge CTR, if the game is already in soft launch, you can gauge even an IPM, all the way down to the IPM. 

Validate expensive changes with models

And we detected that maybe if we put some specific social things in the game, where I could invite a friend and play directly against him and not just a random multiplayer that we had, we had a hypothesis that that would bring in that extra peer pressure and engagement that we needed for the long run. 

So that was our hypothesis and we use the tool and the models to validate that or not, so we started scoring our game. And lo and behold, our game was pretty low in the specific social competition aspect. So that the framework helped us before, because it was a feature that was costly to develop. So before we went all in, the model helped us validate, do users really want this? Is there really a need for this? Of course, at this point, you’re also reading the user reviews and all of that you’re not just looking at that, right. But it was very clear to us after we scored the game, that there was a gap there. So an opportunity there for these social features. We went ahead, we did it. 

And we did it in the way that not only brought engagement but also you could literally invite people that didn’t have the game installed. So it brought up virality together with it and it was like from day one at a 30% increase in just organic users coming from that alone. It was already a pretty established game with a large DAU. But it was instant the way it helped us. So it was a validation tool in that case.

FULL TRANSCRIPT BELOW

Shamanth: I’m very excited to welcome Paula Neves to the mobile user acquisition show. Paula, welcome to the show.

Paula: Thank you so much for having me Shamanth

Shamanth: Absolutely Paula. I’m thrilled to have you because certainly, I’ve read about you being described as among the best mobile product managers around. And certainly you’ve written and you’ve used a lot of very intricate in depth psychological frameworks to understand gamer motivation, which I have been very, very impressed by even when we last spoke. For all of those reasons I’m thrilled to have you here today.

Paula: Thank you so much for the kind words.

Shamanth: Absolutely. You know, we could start at the beginning. What first inspired you to start using psychological frameworks to understand player motivations and start impacting games?

Paula: So yeah, good first question. Interestingly enough, I’ve been doing user acquisition for like 14 years, but my major to begin with was in psychology. So I’m a psychology major. After that, I did a postgraduate in marketing, went straight into UA, did user acquisition for ever, out of which the last seven years were in gaming and most recently, I was always more focused on free to play gaming, which made my psychology degree really worth it in the end because when I when I first did that, I wasn’t sure how I would apply it to my current life in gaming and marketing, but with free to play, it just makes total sense, you know, to leverage the psychology to engage players more and of course monetize more. So that’s where it started.

Shamanth: Yeah, when we talk about psychological frameworks that are used to understand player motivations, what are some of the key models or frameworks that you recommend game product managers use and when should they be using these models?

Paula: So there are a lot of frameworks out there. And there are a lot of models based on the same frameworks but are slightly different, right. So the two main theories in psychology that are most applicable, in my opinion, is just the Big Five personality model, which is the OCEAN model. And there’s also the self determination theory. So the Big Five, we have lots of tools out there that are exploring this now, using that as the basis for their exploration. 

And it’s very useful for pre-prod and for prod, because it helps you determine what will be that first thing that drives the user to your game. So that first impression, why he would download the game, or why he would buy the game. The Big Five framework really helps understanding that so it’s a pre-prod thing. And the self determination theory is really interesting in explaining player engagement and motivation long term. So it’s really useful for production and for live ops as well. Those are the two major ones.

Shamanth: What is the Big Five? What’s the self determination theory? And how are they helpful?

Paula: Yeah, so the Big Five, like I said, it’s called OCEAN as an acronym, so basically it says that people, they have these five factors and they score on a spectrum. So the first one is openness to experience and versus, you know, they could be open or closed to experiences. They could have conscientiousness or not, extroversion or not, agreeableness or not or be more neurotic or more stable. So these are five spectrums and it spells OCEAN because it’s openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and then you score that as a person, you would score something in all of those spectrums, and that would give you one sort of personality. 

And depending on how you put that in your game, right? You will attract, most likely different cohorts of that personality. And the OCEAN is just like when you do a lot of tests, from, unfaithful Facebook tests to more precise scientific ones, a lot of it is based on this as well. And the self determination theory basically talks about three factors that all humans need in order to be self fulfilled and self motivated. 

So all humans are born with the need to feel competent or masterful, to feel autonomous, like what they’re doing has an impact, and that they can do what they want in a sense, and to feel relatedness. 

Shamanth: Gotcha. So it sounds like before a game is launched, you’re looking at what sort of people will it attract, are they extroverted, are they conscientious, are they neurotic, that’s what you’re looking at. And one for a game that is already live, you’re looking at what motivates them?What will motivate them to keep playing? Also, a lot of these models, my understanding is that they were all originally proposed and set up for AAA games, so for you as you thought about applying these to free to play games, what had to change or what had to adapt to make that happen?

Paula: Thankfully, a lot of work has been done already in this field so I didn’t come with a blank slate, by people like Jason Vandenberghe, but you’re right, that was done for AAA games, right. So originally, when Jason Vanderberghe, for instance, thought about his taste maps, which are basically a breakdown of the OCEAN theory in a way you can score your game across four different maps – each of the five things I talked about, he broke up into four different maps. 

But for instance, openness to experience that in his mind would translate to novelty in a game. When it’s time to score it on his map, he puts

an axis that’s fantasy versus realism, and another one that’s builder versus explorer, and you would score your game on that axis, right? But that axis is very AAA, like fantasy realism – you can’t talk about that in mobile free to play.

Like when you have all these match three abstract games. So a big part of my job here was to try and get his theory, go back to hit the psychology books and say, how can I get this essence but try and transform it into things that make sense for mobile free to play, which is what I’ve been working in for the past five to six years, specifically so. For instance, fantasy and realism would become instead story context versus abstract uncontextualized. Because you can have an abstract mobile free to play and there are many out there.

The same thing I said like builder versus explorer becomes impact of the player to the world versus impact of the world on the player. We really had to play around with these axis and go back to the psychology books to think of things that would make sense because I can’t just like, have an idea out of the blue. So I hit the books, I went into this again, tried different axis and then we tested it against the users and the first time it was a bit off, I would say. So we perfected it throughout three years and the final version that I have I talked about in Mobile Spree an event that I think was two years ago.We can share the link also later. And I talked more in depth about that and how we did that change, right. But till today, I look at it as something that I really wish people would call me or write to me saying you know what, I just tried something entirely different and it worked really well because I see it as an ongoing thing still.

Shamanth: Certainly, certainly. And I think that could also be because each game can be different. Each game’s users and audience archetypes can be very different. And also, Paula you said the Big Five is something that you typically recommend looking at before launch. And I’m curious, for a game that has not yet been launched, how do you infer what the ideal audience is – extroverted or introverted, thrill seeking or if the story axis makes more sense, or the impact of the player on the world is more substantial? How do you evaluate that even before a game is launched?

Paula: Yeah, so it depends on the model you want to use. The theory will usually always be the Big Five behind that question. But which model right?

If you use the taste maps, which is what I just mentioned, you have basically the four charts and you score your game against all the factors. And it’s a really interesting communication tool, because we wouldn’t do it together. 

If we were in the same game team,I would do it separately, you would do it separately and then we would, the main stakeholders would do that exercise, and then we would talk about it. Typically we would see very different very, very different results per person. And then I realize someone’s vision for this is completely different than mine. 

So the first thing is that we align our visions of stakeholders, that saves so much time, so much rework and so much time.

If you’re using another model, not the taste maps, but another model based on this, now, I feel that a lot of tools are starting to pay attention to psychology and starting to push this because UA is becoming harder, with iOS 14 no one knows what’s gonna happen. So psychology and looking into play motivation is, I think it’s the next frontier in a way. So it’s nice that we have new models coming up always based on the big five. So currently what we did for the game I’m working on, which is pre launch is we used a specific tool that has a chart. It’s similar to the approach of the taste maps, but it’s a chart that breaks down 12 different user motivations. 

And we did the same thing, we scored our game separately, the vision we had for our game across that, and then we aligned and we’re like, okay, this is the game we want to make. It’s not this one. We’re all aligned. Okay, next step. What are the audiences this game will cater to? Right. 

And then, of course, during this whole process, there’s a lot of benchmarking we’re looking at over 20 different games out there, looking at their audiences, using these tools and being able to tell: okay, so the charts we have now looks very similar to the charts for an explorer type of player, or a more aggressive type of player. And then once we have that chart, it’s very easy to see which audience will obviously be more prone to that game. And then you have to validate it because everything I do we put data, but I guess I’m going to talk about it a little bit later. Otherwise, this will be a long answer. 

Shamanth: Certainly certainly, and I certainly have in my notes to ask you about data and how that fits into something this qualitative. But to ask you a bit more about your last answer, you’re basically in a pre launch game, you’re saying, look, these are the different parameters on which I evaluate this game, you have your teammates do the exact same thing, then you say, “Oh, I thought this was thrilling and you think this is comfortable? Where’s the disconnect?” And so it sounds like you’re aligning on whether we even have the same vision for the game? 

Paula: Yeah that’s the first question, right?

Shamanth: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And what’s the typical outcome of this exercise? Do you walk away with a feature roadmap, or what does that look like?

Paula: So again it depends on where you are with your game. But typically, teams will have a bunch of ideas, ideas are never an issue, teams are super creative, usually. And then you have all these ideas, once you’ve defined, like you said, in your example, “Oh, I thought it was thrilling because we had these ideas and you thought it was not a thrilling game because it was more of an exploration game or something like that”. 

Once we align and say, yeah, it’s an exploration game, but we really want to push this and this idea. So maybe it’s a three, not a five, but a three in thrilling, you’re instantly looking at your idea list, right? If you already have a feature list, it helps you prioritize that, right? Because you can look at your feature list, if the game is already moving more into production, you can look at your feature list and say, okay, using your same thrill example, in our vision, it’s a five. 

With currently what’s designed on paper that we’re going to build, it’s a three, so it’s a big delta from three to five. So we need to think about more things, more features in that sense, so it helps you not only prioritize features, but really revalidate your current ideas and feature list.

Shamanth: Gotcha. And in that case it’s quite a bit of subjectivity. What happens if there’s a disagreement? If you’re like, I think this is thrilling and you think it’s not. If  there’s a fight, what happens?

Paula: Well, even though I’m in Montreal, it’s not like a fight in a hockey game or anything like that. I’m very lucky. I work with the best possible people. Everyone’s very reasonable. So, no, there are no like really big fights we just discussed and try to see our vision, right. In the end, there’s always a major stakeholder that also has the business vision that will have the final word per se, but we’ve never really needed to get that far because we discuss it as a team and we’re able to get to an understanding.

Shamanth: Gotcha, gotcha. And something as you spoke about earlier, how you analyzing other games, you said you analyze over 20 games. So when you’re doing that, what does that analysis process look like?  Are you sitting in a room for multiple days? Is there a specific format in which you take notes? But what does that structure look like of analyzing the competitive landscape?

Paula: Yeah, so, like I said, all of this exercise, even though it seems subjective in a first glance, it all comes from business needs and the market. That’s how we ship our games, right? We, of course, have a lot of creative ideas. And we’re a very creative studio. And that’s the first thing, the most important thing, but we need to validate the business potential and the business needs for that game and that’s my job basically – one of my jobs at least. 

So yeah, so basically, I mean by pre-prod you should have a big list of benchmarks you want to look into, even for small aspects of your game. So I’ve done this exercise in different ways.

I’ve done it where people would think on their own time and then we would adjourn in a four hour meeting to align everything because this alignment period is never fast. 

Because you’re ironing out the communication and I’ve done it in a way also that we took a week to do a workshop focused on figuring out the vision and the mission and everything for the game.

So it works depending on your team and how busy you are. Sometimes, like if you’re super, super busy, like currently, we’re all super busy, you need to say okay, let’s take a week. It’s like you’re on vacation so we’re in a workshop, let’s go off site if possible, nowadays it’s a bit complicated, but you know, it would even help to go off site for three days to do this sort of thing, you know. But it saves a lot of time and rework if visions are aligned and communication is clear.

Shamanth:Yeah. Yeah. And it certainly appears to be one of those high level things with far reaching implications for many, many years. Because you’re essentially defining what the essence of the game itself is So I can certainly see why it can take time and why it needs to take time. However, you know, have you faced resistance or question marks when you say,”Oh, we need to take five days, play 20 games, come back”. Somebody’s like, “no, that’s just too much time”. Have you faced resistance?  And if somebody does face this resistance how would you recommend they think about it?

Paula: Yeah, so there’s always resistance, right? In my mind,

the best way to mitigate resistance is when you pitch something like this, you know, we need to do this, you come prepared with articles, with things that will show people that it’s not just me saying this will help us because these other companies did this, because I’ve done this in the past and look at the results that we had. So usually resistance, I try to fight with evidence and data.

So I would suggest come with a basis, some people will be super thrilled, always, like the product people, the designers they’re always super thrilled about this but there’s always some resistance and so come prepared because it’s a pitch sometimes. Like you’re making a pitch. Right? So come prepared. Come with articles. Luckily there’s a lot of stuff out there today on this. So just come prepared to show data that it’s possible. That usually convinces people.

Shamanth: Wonderful. Yeah. Yeah. And hopefully people will produce this interview and link to it. And how do focus groups or user testing exercises -How do they fit into using these psychological frameworks, if at all they do?

Paula: Yeah. So like I said a little bit earlier, I always try to bring back data into the picture, right. So after we do this mythical exercise, sometimes it seems, but it’s actually pretty science-y because you actually are putting numbers to things, but it is subjective. After you do that,  one thing I always like to do, also because of my background, is using UA to try and validate stuff, right? We’re not going to take just anything and say, okay, you know, this is it, you will use UA and test out, for instance, the different archetypes. 

And user testing comes in very heavily in that sense as well for us. That’s the moment where we tell the team – and we have an awesome team that we work really closely.

We tell the team, “Listen, these are the archetypes we came up with or the personas or whatever word you want to use. Let’s do two things. Let’s run user tests and ask them specific questions and see how they’re playing.” But also something that really really helps us is putting in game surveys – and these in game surveys, they work in a way where they ask users about specific features.

So this is once you’re already tech launched or soft launching, you ask users how they’re playing, how they’re scoring some of these features, depending on what the answer is, you can bucket them into the different archetypes or personas. 

We have their user IDs, as well. So after we do that, we go into our analytics platform, we check their IDs, and see how they’re playing the game and see if it makes sense with our vision of that archetype playing the game, and what they’re saying that they’re doing. So user research helps us throughout the whole process.

In pre-prod user testing helps a lot because we don’t have the service. And then once we’re in production, and we have a tech launch or soft launch we keep doing the tests every time we launch a big feature to see if it appeals to the people we wanted to appeal plus the in game service.So that’s how we do it. 

Shamanth: Gotcha. And then you said you use UA to test archetypes. What’s an example of how you might do that?

Paula: So let’s say you’ve just done the exercise and you see that your game will probably have two or three main types of players.

The way we like to approach this is to do appeal tests. What would a creative look like for persona A, for persona B and  for persona C. So if persona A is more a thrill driven person, we will look for the most thrilling features that we have or that we currently planned and put that in the forefront in the video or in the static, videos are better for that. So we will do that for the different ones. We will gauge CTR, if the game is already in soft launch, you can gauge even an IPM, all the way down to the IPM.

So you can gauge the entire funnel, right? 

And see if it makes sense. But also look at the reach because it’s basically the size of your pie in the market because if it’s too niche so it helps and by the time you’re in the end of soft launch, at least the way I like to do it, I do like to have a pulse on the monetization even though you’re in soft launch, even going down to using purchasers in campaigns using our first purchases group to actually gauge LTV, gauge ROAS and you have those creatives per persona so you can actually start gauging monetization potential per persona. 

And then that drives your monetization strategy as well. And then you might realize, oh, persona C is basically a persona that will help us with virality. It’ll bring in new players, but it’s not a high monetization one, but that’s okay. Because, you know, so it’s a whole process and it helps you out.

Shamanth: Yeah. And I imagine once you tie it to UA, there’s more data, that’s more quantitative insights available to back up the more qualitative insights you’ve had earlier on in this process.

Paula: Exactly. And depending on how you create your campaign as well, you have different ad sets for different personas, you will know using your attribution partner, where these users came from, and you can see in the game, okay, so these came from  the thrill persona, how are they playing the game? You know? Where are they churning? So you can really go deep into the analysis once you have a beta game or a soft launch game.

Shamanth: Yeah. So you’re linking user behavior in game to what brought them in. That is what messaging brought them in and seeing how they behave. Fantastic. Interesting. And thus far we’ve been really talking about how you might apply this to a game that’s either in the process of launch, or, getting ready to launch. How might the application of these models change if you have a game that is already live, running already has lots of players actively engaged?

Paula: Yeah. So it’s a really good question, and it’s also very much applicable. I do believe that the earlier you use it, the better, so if you can use it from pre-prod from the start, that saves a lot of money and time. But even if you used it in the beginning, you might need to use it later on. So it depends on the business needs. So just to give an example, to make it clear, in a previous company, we had a game that was one of our major cash cows, it was doing very well. 

But there was a business need there for longer term retention. And we started analyzing how the players were playing.

And we detected that maybe if we put some specific social things in the game, where I could invite a friend and play directly against him and not just a random multiplayer that we had, we had a hypothesis that that would bring in that extra peer pressure and engagement that we needed for the long run. 

So that was our hypothesis and we use the tool and the models to validate that or not, so we started scoring our game. And lo and behold, our game was pretty low in the specific social competition aspect. So that the framework helped us before, because it was a feature that was costly to develop. So before we went all in, the model helped us validate, do users really want this? Is there really a need for this? Of course, at this point, you’re also reading the user reviews and all of that you’re not just looking at that, right. But it was very clear to us after we scored the game, that there was a gap there. So an opportunity there for these social features. We went ahead, we did it. 

And we did it in the way that not only brought engagement but also you could literally invite people that didn’t have the game installed. So it brought up virality together with it and it was like from day one at a 30% increase in just organic users coming from that alone. It was already a pretty established game with a large DAU. But it was instant the way it helped us. So it was a validation tool in that case.

Shamanth: Absolutely. And that sounds like a very dramatic win that you were able to unlock by just applying some of these models. And just to dig into some of the specifics of what you said, you looked at the game itself, scored the features and said, “Oh, we don’t have social competition in the game itself”. How do you find out if the users actually wanted and may be open and receptive to social competition features?

Paula: Not only did we scored but we know our audience types in our personas, and what motivates them. So we will see that…

Shamanth: How do you find that out?

Paula: Oh, how do we find the personas? it’s the same process of scoring. The process doesn’t change. And once you have a chart, you’re able to fit the personas to that chart, see which personas fit better. Once you have that, you can say okay, so we have a persona here, that’s big on social. 

They’re very big on co-op, but they’re even bigger on competition. Our game has none of those. So you know there’s an opportunity there, at the same time we look at the benchmarks, the benchmarks that have similar motivational drivers to you. What are they doing? And they have this, okay, you look at user research, as well. Of course, the user tests, if your game is live, you have a bunch of user reviews. You collect all of that before you go and build this costly thing that no one wants. So this is sort of how we validate it. 

And sometimes if you use it from the beginning, you already know the gaps you have, right? But you’re still building, you have it in soft launch there. But you know, you know what? For the MVP, we’re going for this, we need social in there, we know you need it, you will prioritize it. But this is our core loop. It’s done. It’s good for our day one to day seven in our soft launch. So we’re going for this but the first thing we’re building is this because it’s missing. For this specific game, we did it differently because we didn’t have the option to use it in the beginning, but it still really validated it to us and it was a game, very hyper casual. So it was very UA driven. And the fact that we put in this feature, it just put a lot of pressure off of UA with organic rising and of course that means lower CPI, we went up at the charts, everything looked beautiful.

Shamanth: Certainly that can be the massive virtuous cycle that can be unlocked just by using many of these tools to engage players better. So for a developer that’s never used any of these models, they’re like, Paula this is amazing, I want to use it for my game. Where should they begin? What’s a good starting point?

Paula: Okay, good question. You don’t need to go to psychology university. Thankfully, there’s a lot of things out there today. So basically, it would really help looking into the theories like the frameworks first. I know it might sound a bit alien for people that haven’t studied this, but there are a lot of resources on self determination theory, on the Big Five. Then look at the work by Jason Vanderberge, Scott Ridley and others, they have some really good stuff on there. 

And there’s also a lot of new tools coming up with this motivational aspect of players and wanting to leverage that. And they also have great resources. I’ve written a lot of stuff around this. So we’re sending in the links, there will be links to Mobile Heroes. I have a bunch of articles there on this. Even looking at other things like the Maslow’s pyramid versus the Tower of Want in game design and things like that. But always starts with the theory, because that’s the basis of everything.

Shamanth: Yeah, totally, totally. And we will link all of that in the show notes, certainly your writings as well. Paula this has been very instructive to me personally. Certainly, there’s very many notes I’m going to take. Thank you so much for being on the mobile user acquisition show. This is perhaps a good place for us to wrap but before we do that  can you tell folks how they can find out more about you and everything you do?

Paula: So, like we said, there will be the links there for people to check out. Also, there’s always my LinkedIn, you can add me there. It’s Paula D Neves. Just D is the middle name for my initial for my middle name, and that’s also my Twitter handle so you can find me around in social media.

Shamanth: Excellent. We’ll even link to all of that and we will link to many of the resources that you did speak about. Paula for now, this has been a pleasure. Thank you again for being on the show.

Paula: For me, too. It was a pleasure. Thank you so much for having me.

A REQUEST BEFORE YOU GO

I have a very important favor to ask, which as those of you who know me know I don’t do often. If you get any pleasure or inspiration from this episode, could you PLEASE leave a review on your favorite podcasting platform – be it iTunes, Overcast, Spotify or wherever you get your podcast fix. This podcast is very much a labor of love – and each episode takes many many hours to put together. When you write a review, it will not only be a great deal of encouragement to us, but it will also support getting the word out about the Mobile User Acquisition Show.

Constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement are welcome, whether on podcasting platforms – or by email to shamanth at rocketshiphq.com. We read all reviews & I want to make this podcast better.

Thank you – and I look forward to seeing you with the next episode!