Advertisers weigh moving to Android as iOS 14 privacy features loom
Citing uncertainty over Apple's iOS 14 App Tracking Transparency feature, some marketing firms are choosing to spend on Android advertising instead.
Credit: Apple
Ahead of Apple's forthcoming App Tracking Transparency in iOS 14.5, advertisers and marketing firms are trying to determine how much this privacy feature will alter their income. Some are reportedly moving their ad spend to Android, at least for the short term, while all are waiting to see the real-world impact of the change.
According to marketing research company Digiday, advertisers expect that costs will go up, but they are not certain how much profits will go down.
"Everyone is nervous about the future and how the performance of their advertising is going to take a hit whenever Apple's changes do arrive," Playbook Media's Bryan Karas said to Digiday. "I wouldn't say anyone is trying to frontload budgets or make big commitments to another platform because there's so much uncertainty."
Nonetheless, some advertisers are reportedly turning to Android. They claim that this is to prepare for the change coupled with a response to how iOS advertising may be declining.
"Because there are a lot of unknowns around the impact of Apple's move, some marketers are allocating budgets to places where they have more control over measurement, i.e Android, Ido Raz of advertising company Bigabid told Digiday. "It's more like budgets are leaning more toward Android."
"[Publishers] that used to be iOS-first are starting to reevaluate the importance of their Android apps, even in markets like the U.S. [that] is historically iOS heavy," said Inmobi's Sergio Serra.
However, other app monetization firms argue that after an initial dip in advertising profits, firms will adopt Apple's new App Tracking Transparency (ATT) and SKAdNetwork frameworks. These are the alternatives to the iOS IDFA (Identifier for Advertisers) that Apple's Craig Federighi says will benefit both users and advertisers.
IDFA allowed advertisers to gain enough information about users to help with targeting ads to them, while still giving privacy protection. ATT will not replace IDFA, but rather will mean that users will have to positively give their consent to be tracked.
Credit: Apple
Ahead of Apple's forthcoming App Tracking Transparency in iOS 14.5, advertisers and marketing firms are trying to determine how much this privacy feature will alter their income. Some are reportedly moving their ad spend to Android, at least for the short term, while all are waiting to see the real-world impact of the change.
According to marketing research company Digiday, advertisers expect that costs will go up, but they are not certain how much profits will go down.
"Everyone is nervous about the future and how the performance of their advertising is going to take a hit whenever Apple's changes do arrive," Playbook Media's Bryan Karas said to Digiday. "I wouldn't say anyone is trying to frontload budgets or make big commitments to another platform because there's so much uncertainty."
Nonetheless, some advertisers are reportedly turning to Android. They claim that this is to prepare for the change coupled with a response to how iOS advertising may be declining.
"Because there are a lot of unknowns around the impact of Apple's move, some marketers are allocating budgets to places where they have more control over measurement, i.e Android, Ido Raz of advertising company Bigabid told Digiday. "It's more like budgets are leaning more toward Android."
"[Publishers] that used to be iOS-first are starting to reevaluate the importance of their Android apps, even in markets like the U.S. [that] is historically iOS heavy," said Inmobi's Sergio Serra.
However, other app monetization firms argue that after an initial dip in advertising profits, firms will adopt Apple's new App Tracking Transparency (ATT) and SKAdNetwork frameworks. These are the alternatives to the iOS IDFA (Identifier for Advertisers) that Apple's Craig Federighi says will benefit both users and advertisers.
IDFA allowed advertisers to gain enough information about users to help with targeting ads to them, while still giving privacy protection. ATT will not replace IDFA, but rather will mean that users will have to positively give their consent to be tracked.
Comments
Look: Google was tracking people back when their CEOs were on Apple's board of directors and were considered a critical strategic Apple partner against Apple's #1 competitor Microsoft and #2 competitor Amazon. Had Google not invented Android - for their own needs to survive against Microsoft due to their locking Google out of Windows CE which at the time everyone thought would eventually amount to something - and thereby joined Microsoft and Amazon as an Apple competitor, Google would still be Apple's #1 partner with their CEOs still on Apple's board. It was only because A. Google's tracking/data/analytics operation was being used to compete with Apple instead of helping Apple compete with Microsoft and B. Apple finally acknowledged that neither iOS or Windows Mobile was going to kill off Android (and later the Android/ChromeOS combo ... see https://www.geekwire.com/2021/chromebooks-outsold-macs-worldwide-2020-cutting-windows-market-share/) that Google and their business model became "bad." There is no record, evidence or hint that Apple felt this before but quite the contrary.
In other words, Apple is just a company after your money like Microsoft, Google, Sony, Facebook and all the rest. If you think otherwise then you are just believing what you want to believe instead of thinking for yourself. Here's the deal: if Apple actually thought Google was this huge threat to humanity they could crush Google tomorrow by coming out with laptops that start at $450 instead of $999 and smartphones worth having - the iPhone SE isn't - that start at $300 instead of $800. Had they done this in 2013 it might have killed off Android entirely. Now it is too late - more than 3 billion satisfied customers too late - but the fact that they aren't even trying to deny market share to "evil Google" shows that they don't really believe Google to be evil to begin with. It is all about money for Apple. Always has been.
Also, this isn't about app purchases but about advertising. Google makes plenty on ads on the Android platform. This site - and Apple sites - tried to ignore this fact and stick to the nonsense "Google isn't making any money on Android!" until the proceedings from the Oracle trial forced them to stop. At first the articles were "Apple makes more money off iOS in a year than Google has made off Android during its entire lifespan!" but when Google's profits kept ballooning those stopped too and the subject was dropped entirely. In other words, you only still belileve the 2008-2011 narrative because sites like this helped created it in the first place and do their level best to keep from correcting it.
We'll just say totally wrong here and move on.
My disgust with laissez-faire capitalism and general capitalist abuse of people and economies has NOTHING to do with Apple’s PR. Apple is on my shit list too, only they’re slightly less bad than the majority of the other tech industry scum.
You want to be an Android cheerleader then knock yourself at out. At least have the balls to use intellectually honest arguments.
What a load of angering twaddle, and how freaking offensive to tell me that I'm only interested in privacy because Apple or any other corporate tells me. I have been concerned about privacy since the explosion of internet use, especially as someone working with vulnerable people and children. Do I think Apple has also been guilty of putting the well-being of vulnerable people at risk to maintain profits? of course; as has probably any organisation that has maintained a relationship with Chinese authorities to keep is production costs down or sell to one of the worlds biggest markets. Do I think there's a business model behind Apple's push for privacy? Absolutely, and I have a few theories but I'll not bore folks here with those speculations.
It is absolutely the case that a great many of us abhor the model of practice that is collecting as much data about individuals, and then selling that data to god knows who for the highest prices. I've watch a generation grow up being conditioned into the practice of sharing their lives on line and not caring about their privacy. I am hoping that many in that generation are in the vanguard of people pushing back against this culture. Those arguments that go "if you're not guilty of anything why would you worry about being tracked" are shockingly naive. Most political systems that have the flavour of democracy are fragile things, one only has to look back at Europe in 1933, and a number of other events that might include the Arab Spring (power vacuums) and the end of the Trump presidency to worry about what a rogue state would do with that data that advertising tracking and Facebook (among others) generate. In those events I worry hugely for the safety of those who might want to push back against a totalitarian dictatorial leadership.
And that doesn't even begin to look at the morality of targeting vulnerable people, those addicted to gambling, those who experience eating disorders etc. Nor the fact that anti-democratic states are buying that data to develop strategies in attempts to influence democratic populations mindsets via false social media accounts. I think they're more easy to spot in UK because every so often an error, such as calling a mobile phone (uk) a cell phone (us) for example, appears in a so called UK post. We would never refer to our iPhones as cell-phones in the UK.
And to cap it all, as a Brit who grew up with good quality TV and advertising; some of the creativity of brands was fantastic and entertaining and built loyalty. I can't help feeling that creativity has suffered at the expense of so called targeting. The really sad thing is ad targeting in my experience creates the creep factor (they're bloody spying on me), repeatedly shows you stuff that you've probably already bought or rejected after your research, and robs you of the opportunity to see things that you didn't know about that you might aspire to buy.
So please Cloudguy don't lecture me and tell me that I didn't care about privacy until Apple brain washed me. I bloody do care about privacy and any organisation that pushes back against me and my data being the commodity is more likely to get my money.
It’s like Charter/Spectrum threatening to take their service out of the US so they can focus on Russia. Can I hold the door for you?