Amazon Appstore earns 3X more than Google Play, Apple's App Store still leads

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 73
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post


    I took his comments as the method was suspect but within that method the numbers are impressive.



    Maybe, but for someone who used to post well thought out and reasonable points (SolipsismX) more often than not, I'm disappointed to see him appearing to go for quantity, not necessarily quality.



    This thread is a glaring example, if you follow the whole thread. AI posts the article at 12.19 ... at 12.24 Sol gives a 3 word post. (impressive numbers amazon) .... 3 different people give their reasons why they don't believe the numbers ... 12.29, 12.37, 12.38 .... then at 12.39 Sol does an "amazing fence sitting job" saying, in essence saying the numbers are probably wrong but still impressive. To me thats fence sitting at it's best .... just makes me wonder if he's getting paid to post or what ? Colour me curious.
  • Reply 62 of 73
    macbook promacbook pro Posts: 1,605member
    About the only cogent argument I can develop from the given data is that Google customers prefer a walled garden and even that is questionable.
  • Reply 63 of 73
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by newbee View Post


    Maybe, but for someone who used to post well thought out and reasonable points (SolipsismX) more often than not, I'm disappointed to see him appearing to go for quantity, not necessarily quality.



    This thread is a glaring example, if you follow the whole thread. AI posts the article at 12.19 ... at 12.24 Sol gives a 3 word post. (impressive numbers amazon) .... 3 different people give their reasons why they don't believe the numbers ... 12.29, 12.37, 12.38 .... then at 12.39 Sol does an "amazing fence sitting job" saying, in essence saying the numbers are probably wrong but still impressive. To me thats fence sitting at it's best .... just makes me wonder if he's getting paid to post or what ? Colour me curious.



    My comment was representative of the numbers themselves and nothing more. In and of themselves they are impressive, are they not? Why can't I think that and still be suspect of how they were generated? If there was a clear angle that allowed me to argue as to why these numbers are false I would have done so but I like to back up my hypotheses and detail how I came to my conclusions.



    Here's another example: Android's activation numbers are impressive but I questioned the methods by which they were generated. Rubin answered most of my questions a few months back but still left some ambiguous areas with the Android activation numbers.
  • Reply 64 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


    If I'm reading this right, it's comparing numbers based on an active user basis. For comparative purposes, Apple is set at the absolute value of 100%. Thus:



    - Each Amazon user generates $0.89 for each dollar a user spends on the App Store.



    - Each Android user generates $0.23 for each dollar a user spends on the App Store.



    It makes no mention of the total number of users on each platform. If Applw has 1,000 users and Amazon has 300, Amazon isn't making 89% of what Applw generates.



    IMO, this is not purposes for a comparison to Apple, which is why Apple is set at the absolute value. The purpose is to compare Amazon users to Android users, and it's showing that Amazon users spend more than Android users.



    Please note I do not endorse the method of collecting the data, as it is likely a flawed approach.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Vthree View Post


    Actually, I think the key here is per active user. Although other Android devices can access the amazon app store as well, it is likely many of the the owners are kindle fire owners where for apple app store, the percentage is higher for iPhone. And I think studies have shown that tablets owners are likely to purchase more apps.



    Also, since the fire was released in Dec, the amount of apps purchased from jan-feb should be high.



    Interesting... I missed the "active user" perspective...



    What is obvious is that Flurry and AI both have agendas -- as we all do!





    I have played/experimented with Flurry in the past... but have not used it in production -- my apps are not available through the app store.





    Here's a link to Flurry's site explaining what they do:



    Advertisers & Agencies - Your Audience Is Using Mobile Apps





    Here's an email I received, yesterday as a developer:



    Quote:

    Flurry



    Dear valued customer,



    We're happy to let you know we are adding exciting upgrades to Flurry Analytics next Tuesday, April 3, which we've been working on since last year. These features will work for any SDK on any platform. Also on the same day, we will release an SDK for iOS that does not use UDIDs and supports all existing and new analytics features.



    If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us at [email protected].



    Thank you,



    The Flurry Team





    Nothing negative implied -- just noting that Flurry has an agenda...



  • Reply 65 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by september11th View Post


    Doesn't make sense at all. There must be at least 10x the number of iOS devices out there compared to the Kindle Fire, and, not trying to fan the flames but the iOS app store is worlds better than the Amazon app store, and Amazon has a fraction of the selection. (I have both, Amazon Apps are janky at best) Unless I'm missing how this data was collected, there's no way in hell Amazon is pulling 89% of whatever Apple is.



    The 10x devices doesn't matter. They are comparing revenue per active user. A big difference from overall revenue.



    Amazon's Appstore for Android is a far more profitable avenue for developers on an active-user basis than Google Play



    I see Post #59 & #60 also posted this.
  • Reply 66 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    From the original blog post:





    Alas, this is not a particularly useful approach to generate informative comparisons. By pre-selecting apps with "similar presence", the authors of the study have biased it towards similar results across platforms. Their method throws out the information about how many such top-ranked apps are sold in each app store, and if there are any large differences between the lower-ranked apps.



    The only conclusion that could be made is that apps with similar presence in all stores drive in similar revenue from in-app purchases. Summing these revenues or directly comparing them is not very meaningful.



    I agree... it isn't meaningful to us!





    I suspect that the purpose of the Flurry Blog is twofold:



    1) convince developers to include Flurry analytics in their apps so they (the developer) and Flurry can measure their penetration -- a bigger statistical pie.



    2) Sell the aggregate analytic results to advertisers





    The "sensationalism" that Flurry used in its blog:



    "For Generating App Revenue, Amazon Shows Google How to Play"



    is just a way to promote their further their services... it is what it is!



  • Reply 67 of 73
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcompuser View Post


    The 10x devices doesn't matter. They are comparing revenue per active user. A big difference from overall revenue.



    Amazon's Appstore for Android is a far more profitable avenue for developers on an active-user basis than Google Play



    I see Post #59 & #60 also posted this.



    I would just add this:



    Mr. advertiser, by using Flurry analytics, you can target your product advertising to the venues where it will be most effective -- and we, Flurry, have our finger on the pulse of an ever-changing dynamic market. (my statement)



    Advertisers & Agencies - Your Audience Is Using Mobile Apps



    Quote:

    Your Audience Is Using Mobile Apps

    The number of consumers using mobile apps dwarfs the number that watches top prime-time TV shows. And while a top show might air up to 40 episodes per year, Flurry reaches its mobile audience 365 days per year. Even better, this mobile app audience is more affluent, educated and engaged than both online and TV audiences. Flurry empowers brands, agencies and developers to reach this audience for less.



  • Reply 68 of 73
    cameronjcameronj Posts: 2,357member
    "In other words, for every dollar in revenue generated from Apple's iOS App Store, the Amazon Appstore for Android brings in 89 cents per active user, while Google Play earns 23 cents for software available at all three storefronts. "



    Was this really necessary?



    Was "Amazon's Appstore made 89 percent of the revenue that the same software did on Apple's App Store on an active-user basis, while Google Play made just 23 percent." so unclear, and did repeating the exact same thing over again clarify it?
  • Reply 69 of 73
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,453member
    Folks, Read it again they are not saying Amazon is generating 89% of Apple revenue App store. They normalize the date as a function of users.



    So what they are saying if Apple is the standard to meet and they bring in $x of total sales and you divide that by the total y register users that number is the 100% mark to hit.



    So on a total revenue/user bases Amazon bring is 89% of the Apple number and Google only bring in 23%. All that means is Apple make more per user than Amazon and Google. In Google case most of their users are not buying apps, most chose to download free apps verse pay for them.



    Also, since Google user base for android is probably larger than Amazon, Google revenue could not larger than Amazon, but Amazon is making more per user than Google so it cost Google more to support their customers
  • Reply 70 of 73
    This is a horribly misleading study. In fact Google probably made way more money - See the logic yourself http://www.pixel-freak.com/Flurry_Mi...lic_With_Study
  • Reply 71 of 73
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OriginalG View Post


    Doesn't seem right. I would think there are a lot fewer Android devices that access the Amazon store than iOS devices that access the Apple App Store, mostly Amazon's own devices like the Fire. So with much fewer devices, they can generate 89% of the revenue Apple does? Sounds like every Fire user must be pouring money out to Amazon.



    If you look a little closer at the article they say that for the same software on the amazon store there making 89% of the revenue that apple is.



    In other words on a software unit per unit basis not hardware basis there making 89% per piece of software that apple does.



    Obviously apple makes a lot more than amazon with its app store because of the sheer number of iOS devices versus kindles. Apple at last count has 355 million iOS devices out there now.



    Quote:

    In this normalized comparison, Amazon's Appstore made 89 percent of the revenue that the same software did on Apple's App Store on an active-user basis



    To put this another way IF amazon had 355 million devices (no way in hell they do) like apples 355 million iOS devices amazon would be making 89% of what apple does on each piece of the same software for instance angry birds. If apple made 1 dollar for every angry birds sold amazon would be making .89 cents for every angry birds sold.
  • Reply 72 of 73
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,014member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    I don't know of any Apple app with an in-app-purchase.



    Cards?
  • Reply 73 of 73
    adamcadamc Posts: 566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post


    I don't believe ANY of them. No one doubts Apple is very far ahead. Beyond that everything else is based on guesses, assumptions, estimations or unverifiable and easily skewed information looking for clicks and eyeballs.



    I am with you on these numbers.



    I could make no idea on how they got those assumed figures and as far as I am concerned they were pulled out from where the sun doesn't shine.



    Btw those droid boys preferred their toys free.
Sign In or Register to comment.