Quibi: When risky assumptions need serious questioning

Quibi is a streaming platform founded in 2018 and launched in April of 2020. It entered the streaming content space with a product rooted in risky assumptions and design. The founders, high-ranking directors from Disney and Dreamworks went from raising $1 billion to currently trying to sell the company off.

To understand what went wrong, we need to look at the problem assumption, solution assumptions and implementation assumptions Quibi made.

Problem assumptions

• Users want to watch videos on their phone
• The length of content is preventing users from watching videos on their phone
• The formatting of content is preventing users from watching shows on their phone

Solution assumptions

• Shorter chunks of content
• Way to view content portrait and landscape mode

Implementation assumptions

• Users will watch more content on their phone if we make 10 minute episodes
• Users will watch episodes in portrait mode frequently
• The ability to watch this content on TV is not a priority

Maybe the riskiest of the assumptions above, and the bedrock of their product’s value proposition is that users want to watch videos on their phone. In 2018, Netflix themselves presented data showing that only 10% of their users watched shows on their phone.

I believe Quibi’s founders looked at the success of other apps and services that offered short-form content like Vine and TikTok and thought about how to use that solution to solve a problem they assume existed. Embedded in that logic is an assumption that could have been explored if they asked potential users during the research phase, “What do you think or feel about video posts on social media platforms? How is that the same or different from a show you watch on Netflix or Hulu?”

Another risky assumption while developing this product was that the ability to watch content on televisions was not important as a feature on launch. The fact that content could only be viewed on your phone was oddly touted as a selling point. For many users, myself included, this limitation made it a non-starter. I was not going to become invested in a show if I did not have the flexibility to watch content the way I prefer.

Maybe the worst thing I found during my research was that the company saw COVD-19 as the main reason their launch in April was a failure. This also is a product of a risky assumption — that viewing content on mobile phones was lower than expected because people were staying at home more often. It skirts the real underlying problem and the possibility that user behavior just does not line up with their solution.

If a company is unable or unwilling to question their assumptions, how will they find useful solutions? Without useful solutions —how can you product not be doomed to fail?