OK, so I had started writing this post---being very skeptical of the figure. I thought that there was no way you'd be able to get companies to pony up $10 million. Super Bow ads go for 1/4 that, for Pete's sake.
Then I did some research. Coca-Cola spends something like $1 billion on marketing every year worldwide and $375 million in the U.S. alone. The major auto manufacturers spend $1 billion EACH. JCP and Federated stores spend $4B. Wowsa! Of course, that might include salaries and benefits of their internal marketing departments, but still.
I just had no idea we were talking those kinds of numbers. Then again, I don't exactly see computer related firms lining up to pay that kind of money.
Imagine their surprise when because they were first on board when iAd launches, they end up with millions and millions of clicks from people wanting to see the iAd magic and have no intention of buying.
Imagine their surprise when because they were first on board when iAd launches, they end up with millions and millions of clicks from people wanting to see the iAd magic and have no intention of buying.
In addition to the high cost, Apple also seeks to have greater control over advertisers' marketing campaigns, author Emily Steel wrote.
Hrrrm? Can't see where that's going to go over too well, particularly with the erratic stewardship of the App Store as a widely know example.
"We've declined to accept your campaign because we think it's stupid/offensive/libelous/we just don't like it. We have some suggestions regarding how to make it less stupid/offensive/libelous/more likable." Yeah, ad agencies are going to love that.
Great exposure for the advertiser. Just think more than 50 million Iphones out there.
And this may be good for the customer also. How so, simple when a company gets nuts the customers start clicking on the banners wasting their money.
BOTTOM LINE: Ads will have to be descreet, catchy and NOT ANNOYING.
It seems like Apple is cultivating, for the lack of a better word, a better ad clientele, so hopefully when it settles down, they'll have the clout to reject the spammy type of ads like the "obey one rule", discount ED pills, shady teeth whitener ads and similar trash. This isn't saying that the big companies don't do bad things, but hopefully there's somewhat higher standard of what's allowed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
Isn't this kind of shades of iTunes LP cost estimates which were out of whack?
The article here says "at launch", and I recall iTunes LP system later opened up so bands could submit their own. So I think the buy-in will probably go down as they settle into their system.
Makes sense for the 80+ million iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad users out there. It'll only get bigger.
It's not just an issue of quantity, but quality.
What most people are ignoring is that this 80+ million (and growing) number consists of some of the most well-heeled, educated, high-end eyeballs out there.
The pricing could very well be appropriate given the consumer-market segment that those ads will be reaching.
What makes ads exclusive to free apps? Not the point I was trying to make anyway, but thanks.
Ads aren't totally exclusive to free apps, but most paid apps don't seem to have ads in them.
I think a valid point is that you generally can chose a different app if you don't like how one behaves. In a competitive app market, there's plenty of room for differentiation and market segmentation. Those that don't want to pay for apps can get the the ad-using "lite" version, the paid app generally does away with ads and includes more features.
first let us realize this is not about Nike, even though they are the devil of all shoe companies.
Lets look at the app side. I know there are a growing number of folks who do not want any type of banner add showing up within their apps on the phone and iPad. I would probably pretian to NEW apps and not apps you already have downloaded I assume but there is no clarification yet on that. As an owner of both products I do not like the idea and if I were a customer considering the switch I would think Long and hard on it IF this actually does happen. But since that is just in the planning stages I do not think we need to worry for a while yet. And Like everything else they do It would probably effect the States and not the rest of the world, at least not for some time..
Bottom line lets wait and see.. Would not be the first time an idea from apple got trashed. We can only hope.
Ads aren't totally exclusive to free apps, but most paid apps don't seem to have ads in them.
I think a valid point is that you generally can chose a different app if you don't like how one behaves. In a competitive app market, there's plenty of room for differentiation and market segmentation. Those that don't want to pay for apps can get the the ad-using "lite" version, the paid app generally does away with ads and includes more features.
I don't particularly have any feelings about whether an ad appears in my app. I don't think I've ever deliberately clicked on one, ever.
The point I was trying to make is iAds is promoting a more immersive/qualitative experience. It would seem to me that it's not such a large leap to see the Ad itself as becoming 'the content' in certain contexts. Yes, I appreciate that one would have to click on a banner to invoke the advertising content but I wonder how far the day is away where the game/app is essentially the advertising content itself.
I can see advertisers getting poor value for their investment. They will be treading a fine line between providing product information and the ad itself being sufficient content for entertainment purposes. At the suggested $2 click thru, if your ad goes viral it could be a very expensive proposition.
I don't particularly have any feelings about whether an ad appears in my app. I don't think I've ever deliberately clicked on one, ever.
The point I was trying to make is iAds is promoting a more immersive/qualitative experience. It would seem to me that it's not such a large leap to see the Ad itself as becoming 'the content' in certain contexts. Yes, I appreciate that one would have to click on a banner to invoke the advertising content but I wonder how far the day is away where the game/app is essentially the advertising content itself.
I can see advertisers getting poor value for their investment. They will be treading a fine line between providing product information and the ad itself being sufficient content for entertainment purposes. At the suggested $2 click thru, if your ad goes viral it could be a very expensive proposition.
I see what you mean. I think a lot of the apps that are in the store now are really ads, though that depends on how you look at it.
I can see limiters being in place though, at least I would hope so. Google Adwords lets you place a daily limit on how much money you spend. When you hit the limit, the ad isn't served again for the rest of the day.
Comments
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...using-stir.ars
The chances of me buying an iPhone or iPad are diminishing rapidly.
.
Apple is DOOMED!!!!!
OK, so I had started writing this post---being very skeptical of the figure. I thought that there was no way you'd be able to get companies to pony up $10 million. Super Bow ads go for 1/4 that, for Pete's sake.
Then I did some research. Coca-Cola spends something like $1 billion on marketing every year worldwide and $375 million in the U.S. alone. The major auto manufacturers spend $1 billion EACH. JCP and Federated stores spend $4B. Wowsa! Of course, that might include salaries and benefits of their internal marketing departments, but still.
I just had no idea we were talking those kinds of numbers. Then again, I don't exactly see computer related firms lining up to pay that kind of money.
Imagine their surprise when because they were first on board when iAd launches, they end up with millions and millions of clicks from people wanting to see the iAd magic and have no intention of buying.
I just had no idea we were talking those kinds of numbers. Then again, I don't exactly see computer related firms lining up to pay that kind of money.
You forgot to list that Apple's advertising budget was $486M is 2008:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=2545
Here's there 2009 Budget, along with MS's, Dell, and RIM's:
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2009/10/...alf-a-billion/
You want to eat your words yet.
Advertising business is a Billion dollar business for the big businesses.
Imagine their surprise when because they were first on board when iAd launches, they end up with millions and millions of clicks from people wanting to see the iAd magic and have no intention of buying.
In addition to the high cost, Apple also seeks to have greater control over advertisers' marketing campaigns, author Emily Steel wrote.
Hrrrm? Can't see where that's going to go over too well, particularly with the erratic stewardship of the App Store as a widely know example.
"We've declined to accept your campaign because we think it's stupid/offensive/libelous/we just don't like it. We have some suggestions regarding how to make it less stupid/offensive/libelous/more likable." Yeah, ad agencies are going to love that.
If the charge is a penny an impression the FIRST thing you are going to see when you open an app is that dinky little banner.
$2 per click? That seems sort of....high.
Is it?
It really depends on the product.
Great exposure for the advertiser. Just think more than 50 million Iphones out there.
And this may be good for the customer also. How so, simple when a company gets nuts the customers start clicking on the banners wasting their money.
BOTTOM LINE: Ads will have to be descreet, catchy and NOT ANNOYING.
It seems like Apple is cultivating, for the lack of a better word, a better ad clientele, so hopefully when it settles down, they'll have the clout to reject the spammy type of ads like the "obey one rule", discount ED pills, shady teeth whitener ads and similar trash. This isn't saying that the big companies don't do bad things, but hopefully there's somewhat higher standard of what's allowed.
Isn't this kind of shades of iTunes LP cost estimates which were out of whack?
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...using-stir.ars
The article here says "at launch", and I recall iTunes LP system later opened up so bands could submit their own. So I think the buy-in will probably go down as they settle into their system.
This is sad. Seems to me we are approaching the point where advertising IS the content. And here we sit, lapping it up like the iDiots we are.
If the charge is a penny an impression the FIRST thing you are going to see when you open an app is that dinky little banner.
then buy a paid app and quit your whining.
Makes sense for the 80+ million iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad users out there. It'll only get bigger.
It's not just an issue of quantity, but quality.
What most people are ignoring is that this 80+ million (and growing) number consists of some of the most well-heeled, educated, high-end eyeballs out there.
The pricing could very well be appropriate given the consumer-market segment that those ads will be reaching.
What makes ads exclusive to free apps? Not the point I was trying to make anyway, but thanks.
Ads aren't totally exclusive to free apps, but most paid apps don't seem to have ads in them.
I think a valid point is that you generally can chose a different app if you don't like how one behaves. In a competitive app market, there's plenty of room for differentiation and market segmentation. Those that don't want to pay for apps can get the the ad-using "lite" version, the paid app generally does away with ads and includes more features.
Lets look at the app side. I know there are a growing number of folks who do not want any type of banner add showing up within their apps on the phone and iPad. I would probably pretian to NEW apps and not apps you already have downloaded I assume but there is no clarification yet on that. As an owner of both products I do not like the idea and if I were a customer considering the switch I would think Long and hard on it IF this actually does happen. But since that is just in the planning stages I do not think we need to worry for a while yet. And Like everything else they do It would probably effect the States and not the rest of the world, at least not for some time..
Bottom line lets wait and see.. Would not be the first time an idea from apple got trashed. We can only hope.
That means > 100 million potential viewers only costs $10 Million? That's a bargain.
*sigh*
There goes my hope to buy an iAd for my homemade lemonade.
Ads aren't totally exclusive to free apps, but most paid apps don't seem to have ads in them.
I think a valid point is that you generally can chose a different app if you don't like how one behaves. In a competitive app market, there's plenty of room for differentiation and market segmentation. Those that don't want to pay for apps can get the the ad-using "lite" version, the paid app generally does away with ads and includes more features.
I don't particularly have any feelings about whether an ad appears in my app. I don't think I've ever deliberately clicked on one, ever.
The point I was trying to make is iAds is promoting a more immersive/qualitative experience. It would seem to me that it's not such a large leap to see the Ad itself as becoming 'the content' in certain contexts. Yes, I appreciate that one would have to click on a banner to invoke the advertising content but I wonder how far the day is away where the game/app is essentially the advertising content itself.
I can see advertisers getting poor value for their investment. They will be treading a fine line between providing product information and the ad itself being sufficient content for entertainment purposes. At the suggested $2 click thru, if your ad goes viral it could be a very expensive proposition.
I don't particularly have any feelings about whether an ad appears in my app. I don't think I've ever deliberately clicked on one, ever.
The point I was trying to make is iAds is promoting a more immersive/qualitative experience. It would seem to me that it's not such a large leap to see the Ad itself as becoming 'the content' in certain contexts. Yes, I appreciate that one would have to click on a banner to invoke the advertising content but I wonder how far the day is away where the game/app is essentially the advertising content itself.
I can see advertisers getting poor value for their investment. They will be treading a fine line between providing product information and the ad itself being sufficient content for entertainment purposes. At the suggested $2 click thru, if your ad goes viral it could be a very expensive proposition.
I see what you mean. I think a lot of the apps that are in the store now are really ads, though that depends on how you look at it.
I can see limiters being in place though, at least I would hope so. Google Adwords lets you place a daily limit on how much money you spend. When you hit the limit, the ad isn't served again for the rest of the day.