Yes, compared to other mobile ad networks this is bad. People aren't rocketing up the install lists by having their $10 a day budgets not being filled.
> We chose to run the ads on apps from the following categories: Photo & Video, Social Networking, Entertainment, Games, Food & Drink and Utilities.
Those are some of the very largest targets you can have. Apple was unable to provide enough impressions to meet $10 a day.
Quick clarification - at the target CPC or CPA they specified, Apple was unable to deliver enough impressions to meet $10 per day.
(Their average CPC was $.01, and their desired CPA was $.40).
Agreed that $10 a day is not enough to keep their app rocketing up the install lists. However, like any PPC or CPA advertising, iAd is a bidding system - and priority of impressions will go towards those that bid more. Your assertion would be like having a Google AdWords bid of $.01 for a high-performing keyword, and because you aren't featured on page 1 of the SERPs & only get a few impressions, concluding that Google doesn't have the audience to support your budget.
Agreed. The thing is that after they have put the price to 50 USD it incentivises indie developers to test it out, which intern results in a higher fill rate for the apps. I think this is just a start, maybe there is a lot more.
Just a question is the CPA also really bad compared to the other ad networks?
It doesn't seem bad, but the CPA doesn't really matter if they can't fill. If Apple is leaving money on the table that means they just don't have the impressions (which is believable, you don't see iAds in a lot of apps).
It could also be a targeting problem (they don't know who is most likely to download), but iOS users are pretty app happy so I would imagine this is the easiest type of ad to convert with. Apple has a huge advantage here as the control the whole ecosystem and are the only ones in the world who can optimize the App Store. Just 25 installs after 1,702 taps for a free app with good reviews seems depressingly low.
I feel like there's so much negative I've heard about iAd, but this is the first real feedback I've ever seen on the tool. Now that they've reduced the minimum spending cost it seems like we should start seeing more soon.
I'm interested to know if anyone has any experience from the developer side, how iAd compares to non-native Ad services within iOS apps. What is that experience like?
It is, Apple is terrible at advertising sales. I think they thought that would mean they would only get large branding campaigns (Toyota, Coca Cola, McDonalds etc) that would pay high CPMs and that those large advertisers would clamor to reach the high spending iOS users. It failed as hard as an advertising platform can fail, evidences by dropping the minimum from $1,000,000 to $50 and is still not gaining traction.
Initially it was aimed at big-budget ad agencies. The idea was that they could create polished little micro-sites that were launched from the ad, and wouldn't have to leave the app showing the ad.
In reality, ad-funded apps never really took off on iOS, probably due to free-with-in-app-purchase becoming a big money maker. And with the growth of Android, making a platform specific ad was not nearly as appealing.
Except that didn't happen and they had no ads to run on their highly touted network. If you want to jump start the service with a few big fish you sign deals with a few big fish. You need to have ads to fill inventory or there will be no inventory to sell.
>Except that didn't happen and they had no ads to run on their highly touted network.
Nope, it did happen. When they started it they had quite nice rooster of collaborating companies, and quite good conversion rates. At some point, they had 15% of the mobile ad market.
Plus, they didn't just go from 1M to $50 because nobody came to them at $1M. That was the inital price back in 2010, and just for the launch. Afterwars it was a gradual progress of opening the service and letting more advertisers in (went to $500,000, then to $100,000 etc)
> Plus, they didn't just go from 1M to $50 because nobody came to them at $1M. That was the inital price back in 2010, and just for the launch. Afterwars it was a gradual progress of opening the service and letting more advertisers in (went to $500,000, then to $100,000 etc)
It's a high ask, but there's a fundamental difference between iAd talked about in this article and the million dollar commitment iAd they started off as. The original vision for iAd was branding campaigns ie-tv and magazine like campaigns. A million dollars minimum and from Apple isn't crazy at first glance. What they're focused on now, especially in this article, is CPI app installs. Totally different markets.
Actually talking about two very different products here. iAd banner ads, what the OP is talking about, are cheap and accessible.
The large minimum spends still apply to rich media iAds. Despite iAd Producer being readily available, the ads you create in it can only be used as creative for rich media campaigns. That requires a relationship with an iAd account manager and a minimum spend of $100,000 per campaign per region (as of last week).
That's pennies. Broadcast TV can be more than $40 cpm, often going above $90-100. Cable has a lower average which still exceeds the price of most online inventory.
