Apple increases developer revenue in iAd to 70%

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014


Apple has announced to developers that it has increased developers' share of revenue in iAd from 60 percent to 70 percent.



The announcement came on Apple's official developer center in a brief statement. It means that developers can earn an extra 10 percent share from using Apple's own mobile advertising network, dubbed iAd.



Quote:

Developer Advertising Services Agreement Update



We have made the following changes to the Developer Advertising Services Agreement for the iAd Network, effective immediately.



The revenue share for the iAd Network is now 70% to the Developer.



Apple's iAd service has struggled since it launched in 2010. In February, one report claimed that Apple was considering a number of changes in an effort to rekindle interest in the mobile advertising platform.



Options that were on the table for Apple at the time were reducing the minimum campaign amount, adjusting its fees, and increasing developer revenue share. The latter was officially adopted by Apple on Sunday.



Advertisers can now spend as little as $100,000 to initiate mobile campaigns, down from a $300,000 threshold that went into effect last July. The current minimum represents just a fraction of the lofty $1 million minimum when the service launched in 2010 and the $500,000 entry price from last February.



[ View article on AppleInsider ]

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 38
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    While clearly not Apple's most successful service I don't see any evidence that it's losing money. It looks bad but they can keep this going until they figure it out. That $1 million minimum reminded me of the $200 Burger King hamburger.
  • Reply 2 of 38
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple's iAd service has struggled since it launched in 2010. In February, one report claimed that Apple was considering a number of changes in an effort to rekindle interest in the mobile advertising platform.



    Struggled? IIRC, iAds was the #2 advertising service on mobile devices.



    This site is somewhat outdated, but clearly iAds were not 'struggling'.

    http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic..._2011_revenue/
  • Reply 3 of 38
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Struggled? IIRC, iAds was the #2 advertising service on mobile devices.



    This site is somewhat outdated, but clearly iAds were not 'struggling'.

    http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic..._2011_revenue/



    Any service or product of Apple that isn't #1 by a mile is now considered struggling. How times have changed...
  • Reply 4 of 38
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Struggled? IIRC, iAds was the #2 advertising service on mobile devices.



    This site is somewhat outdated, but clearly iAds were not 'struggling'.

    http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic..._2011_revenue/



    That is a research company projecting why they think will happen in 2011.
  • Reply 5 of 38
    wurm5150wurm5150 Posts: 763member
    It's hard for advertisers to commit to a service that is expensive and isn't cross-platform. Maybe Apple should expand iAds to the Mac and perhaps Safari since iAds is HTML5 based.



    Ads is Google's bread and butter, if Apple wants to go thermonuclear on them, why not go after and eat their food?
  • Reply 6 of 38
    constable odoconstable odo Posts: 1,041member
    Any Apple service or product that isn't wildly successful is considered struggling if not a complete failure by the media. Everything that Apple does has to be near perfect to get positive press. Apple hsas clearly made some mistakes with iAd or else it wouldn't have had to been constantly adjusted to draw clients. I think this is mainly due to the weak economy, but I might be wrong. I'd honestly like to see how it compares with what Google is doing to see if the service is doing as badly as is being mentioned. \
  • Reply 7 of 38
    sleepy3sleepy3 Posts: 244member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post


    Any Apple service or product that isn't wildly successful is considered struggling if not a complete failure by the media. Everything that Apple does has to be near perfect to get positive press. Apple hsas clearly made some mistakes with iAd or else it wouldn't have had to been constantly adjusted to draw clients. I think this is mainly due to the weak economy, but I might be wrong. I'd honestly like to see how it compares with what Google is doing to see if the service is doing as badly as is being mentioned. \



    Compared to Google? Google kinda own the ad market don't they? Hell, I'm willing to bet the ads i see on APPLEINSIDER.COM are by google.



    And to be fair, the media is that way with anyone. Google's growth in tablet market share is amaziing considering it started at ZERO just a year and half ago. But still its looked at as a complete disaster. Same goes for Microsft. Vista is labelled as a disaster, even totally ignoring the fact that it sold better than any other OS BY MILES except windows XP was just more popular. Sony has sold about 60 million PS3's but the media constantly say its a horrible failure cause it isn't number one, its behind the Wii. Same for the 70 million or so PSP's that they sold. Media calls it a disaster.



    That's just how the world works in the media, if you are not number one, you have failed. Its nothing SPECIAL to Apple products.



    But in the end...WHO CARES???!!!! ITS ADS PEOPLE!!!!!!



    Who among us LIKE to see ads? *chirping**tumble weed*

    So then why would we care who wins the ad war? Its just more ads that everyone hates anyway.
  • Reply 8 of 38
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by elroth View Post


    Any service or product of Apple that isn't #1 by a mile is now considered struggling. How times have changed...



    Psychologically, sure. Technically, anything that isn't a loss is a success.



    But are they making it work well? It doesn't sound like it? Are they closing in on AdMob? It doesn't sound like it.



    This is the somewhat of the reverse of another poster saying RiM's PlayBook was a success because it was #3 among tablets. It's not only a market failure but a financial one, too.
  • Reply 9 of 38
    isheldonisheldon Posts: 570member
    The less ads the better. The screen is small enough without that garbage infiltrating my paid apps/subscriptions. I can't stand this ad nuisance.
  • Reply 10 of 38
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post


    It's hard for advertisers to commit to a service that is expensive and isn't cross-platform. Maybe Apple should expand iAds to the Mac and perhaps Safari since iAds is HTML5 based.







    The problem with iAd is it really wasn't rolled out in an Apple like fashion. Who is Apple trying to serve through iAds? Namely, its developers by giving them another way to make money. To assist developers to do this, Apple needs to make the platform appeal to advertisers. This means bringing the ads to a large audience for a good price.



    Apple, however, 1) made the platform difficult to design ads for (it has since improved this), and 2) charges a huge premium (it is trying to fix that).



    If I were Apple, I would make the service cross platform. Apple isn't going to keep developers for designing for Android so it might as well make the developers happy and make some money in the process. Further, Apple can then easily advertise its products to other platforms in a low cost fashion. For instance, Apple could easily push out ads to other platform and only pay the developer the thirty percent. Currently, I suspect many advertisers want to go with a platform that reaches beyond APple's ecosystem.
  • Reply 11 of 38
    mauszmausz Posts: 242member
    April Fool's ?
  • Reply 12 of 38
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post


    It's hard for advertisers to commit to a service that is expensive and isn't cross-platform. Maybe Apple should expand iAds to the Mac and perhaps Safari since iAds is HTML5 based.



    While your initial premise makes sense, the iPhone customer represents a wealthier than average market segment. If I want to focus my marketing to that affluent segment, then I would choose to do that. Android users, for example, are a much broader kind of market that hardly ever will pay for apps and far less likely to buy my high-end products.
  • Reply 13 of 38
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post


    The less ads the better. The screen is small enough without that garbage infiltrating my paid apps/subscriptions. I can't stand this ad nuisance.



    Apparently you don't know that iAds are only found on FREE aps.
  • Reply 14 of 38
    ljocampoljocampo Posts: 657member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    The problem with iAd is it really wasn't rolled out in an Apple like fashion. Who is Apple trying to serve through iAds? Namely, its developers by giving them another way to make money. To assist developers to do this, Apple needs to make the platform appeal to advertisers. This means bringing the ads to a large audience for a good price.



    Why is it OK when people advocate more ads. If I pay for an app it better not have any ads in it. I don't BUY any software program where the developer believes making more than the price of the program, at my expense. Either charge upfront with the margin you believe your IP is worth or give it away free and make money on ads. I won't be using an app with ads in it but I'm sure if it were free people will use it and accept the ads.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Currently, I suspect many advertisers want to go with a platform that reaches beyond APple's ecosystem.



    Actually, I'm sure advertisers would rather you wear a tattoo on your forehead. Advertisers probably were amazed they got away with designer clothes. They can't seem to get the brand big enough though. BTW: I don't buy them either, that is unless they are willing to pay me to market their wares.
  • Reply 15 of 38
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Struggled? IIRC, iAds was the #2 advertising service on mobile devices.



    This site is somewhat outdated, but clearly iAds were not 'struggling'.

    http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic..._2011_revenue/



    Also everyone has to understand that iAD is only on the iPhone and i devices, there is no android or windows version of this software, unlike googles system which is on both android and the iPhone
  • Reply 16 of 38
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post


    Ads is Google's bread and butter, if Apple wants to go thermonuclear on them, why not go after and eat their food?



    They quietly are. It is well known that apple has invested in three different mapping companies and is already hurting google with siri bypassing ads on web pages that it accesses, there also collecting data on mapping services and I imagine there will come a day that google will not be used in maps or any part of the iDevices. That is scary for google since the iDevices represent 2/3rds of googles mobile revenue from ads if not more by some accounts. Even more revenue than there own android devices. In my opinion from what I have read about it, it is not a matter of if but when.
  • Reply 17 of 38
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    Apple, however, 1) made the platform difficult to design ads for (it has since improved this),



    how have they improved this?
  • Reply 18 of 38
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post


    They quietly are. It is well known that apple has invested in three different mapping companies and is already hurting google with siri bypassing ads on web pages that it accesses, there also collecting data on mapping services and I imagine there will come a day that google will not be used in maps or any part of the iDevices. That is scary for google since the iDevices represent 2/3rds of googles mobile revenue from ads if not more by some accounts. Even more revenue than there own android devices. In my opinion from what I have read about it, it is not a matter of if but when.



    I believe Google pays Apple quite a bit of money to keep both Google Maps and also the default search set to Google on iOS. They also don't allow Google to put ads in either of those services. Canceling those contracts most likely would have a negative effect on Apple's bottom line. They would have to come up with some persuasive rational as to how providing less robust services would improve their profitability. Cutting off those services simply to punish Google does not benefit Apple unless at the same time they can also provide a better more profitable replacements for those services.
  • Reply 19 of 38
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Constable Odo View Post


    I'd honestly like to see how it compares with what Google is doing to see if the service is doing as badly as is being mentioned. \



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    But are they making it work well? It doesn't sound like it? Are they closing in on AdMob? It doesn't sound like it.



    Luckily, a few days ago this site gave us some recent data points to help us compare to Google, AdMob, et al!



    http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...m_android.html



    For the U.S.:





    That’s mobile. iAds is obviously not involved in desktop ads (nor radio, etc.) I don’t know whether those percentages are for in-app ads only, or simply as stated “mobile” ads in general including web ads. If those stats are for in-app PLUS web ads, with web ads being clearly the most common, then iAds is at a huge disadvantage in those number and yet still doing amazingly. If, on the other hand, those are in-app ads, alone, well, that’s all iAds is meant for, and it’s doing great by that metric as well.



    (The only “struggle” I care about is opting out of ad networks tracking me!)
  • Reply 20 of 38
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post


    Luckily, a few days ago this site gave us some recent data points to help us compare to Google, AdMob, et al!



    http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...m_android.html



    For the U.S.:





    That?s mobile. iAds is obviously not involved in desktop ads (nor radio, etc.) I don?t know whether those percentages are for in-app ads only, or simply as stated ?mobile? ads in general including web ads. If those stats are for in-app PLUS web ads, with web ads being clearly the most common, then iAds is at a huge disadvantage in those number and yet still doing amazingly. If, on the other hand, those are in-app ads, alone, well, that?s all iAds is meant for, and it?s doing great by that metric as well.



    (The only ?struggle? I care about is opting out of ad networks tracking me!)



    Right - so how are they 'struggling'?
Sign In or Register to comment.